Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 229

DISCOURSE STRATEGIES

OF LECTURERS IN HIGHER EDUCATION


CLASSROOM INTERACTION:
A CASE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF
DAR ES SALAAM, TANZANIA

Nikuigize Erick Shartiely

Dissertation submitted in fulfilment of the requirements


for the degree of
PhD in General Linguistics
at
Stellenbosch University

Supervisor:

Prof. Christine Anthonissen

March 2013
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

DECLARATION

I, the undersigned, hereby declare that the work contained in this dissertation is my own original
work and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it at any university for a
similar or any other award.

22 December 2012

Nikuigize Erick Shartiely Date

Copyright © 2013
Stellenbosch University
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work has been made possible through the contributions of different individuals and
organisations. I am truly indebted to colleagues, family and friends. Firstly, my heartfelt gratitude
goes to the African Doctoral Academy (ADA) for awarding me a full scholarship for full time
doctoral study in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences at the Stellenbosch University, South
Africa.

Secondly, in a similar way, I extend my gratitude to the University of Dar es Salaam, my employer,
for allowing me a three-year study leave during the time for this study. I also acknowledge the
financial assistance the University furnished me with through the Directorate of Research and
Publication. The research fund and the air tickets for all the academic trips I made created an
environment enormously conducive for pursuing a doctoral award.

Thirdly, I wish to recognise the most helpful group of eight lecturers from the Department of
Political Science and Public Administration and the Department of Sociology and Social
Anthropology of the University of Dar es Salaam for agreeing, without any reservations, to
participate in my study. You provided me with valuable data that has yielded this work. Thank you
very much for your academic openness!

Fourthly, I wish to articulate my special appreciation to my supervisor, prof. Christine Anthonissen,


for her uncompromising commitment that she devoted to my work. Your guidance, comments and
patience, mark an everlasting experience to emulate in both my professional and social life.

Fifthly, I wish to signal my appreciation of the voluntary assistance rendered to me by my


colleagues in the Department of Foreign Languages and Linguistics as well as the Department of
Literature of the University of Dar es Salaam. These are Aurelia Mallya, Julius Taji, Loveluck
Philip, and Yunus Ng'umbi, for helping in transcribing the recorded data free of charge; may God
bless your helping hand. I also acknowledge the technical support from my brother and friend, Jonas
Tiboroha, for initiating me into the ABCs of using software for data analysis, particularly for
training me on the use of NviVo.

Sixthly, I must acknowledge the contributions from staff and fellow students of the Department of
General Linguistics of Stellenbosch University for the material and moral support that they
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

iii

extended to me during the time of the study. Particular appreciation is on the valuable comments
made on my work at different stages from proposal to completion and the official assistance from
the Department's assistants.

Lastly, but most importantly, I profoundly commend the most important people in my life who
directly felt the throb of the social and psychological turmoil associated with academic
commitments. These are my wife (Lennyster), my daughter (Ana) and my son (Michi), for
tolerating my enduringly long absence from home. I missed you physically but morally and
spiritually, we were together.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

iv

ABSTRACT

This study investigates how linguistic super diversity is managed in a higher education context in
Tanzania. Specifically, the use of language in lectures to large classes made up of students with
linguistically diverse backgrounds at the University of Dar es Salaam is in focus. Considering the
multilingualism of the students as well as the lecturers, and a language-in-education policy, which
prescribes English as the language of teaching and learning, the study is interested in the
perceptions and practices of those teaching big numbers of students in large lecture halls.

The data comprised eight recorded lectures and interviews with the respective lecturers. The
intention was to identify, describe, document and analyse interactional strategies that lecturers
use, particularly the discourse strategies that lecturers use in conveying new information at a
relatively sophisticated level of academic rhetoric, and to facilitate interaction between them and
students. With large numbers of students in the audience, and given that they are first year
students new to the university-spoken register, lecturers are likely to make remarkable language
choices consciously or unconsciously.

Conversational Analysis (CA) and Discourse Analysis (DA) approaches facilitated the
identification and analysis of conversational and discursive features of lectures as part of spoken
registers that are generically used in university teaching. The analysis particularly considered the
linguistic diversity of the participants in the higher education context in Tanzania and how
lecturers use language to cater for such diversity. The sample involved eight lecturers, four from
each of two departments regarded among those with the highest student numbers in the College
of Arts and Social Sciences of the University of Dar es Salaam, namely the Department of
Political Science and Public Administration and the Department of Sociology and Social
Anthropology.

The findings indicate that lecturers use a selected number of both propositional and structural
discourse strategies during lecture sessions. The three most notable propositional discourse
strategies are repetition, use of questions, and use of code switching between English and
Kiswahili. Lecturers use phrasal and clausal types of repetition to achieve cohesion, topic
continuity and emphasis. They use tag, rhetorical, open and closed types of questions to check for
comprehension, to stimulate higher level thinking, to manage classroom behaviour as well as to
encourage students' participation and independent study. They also use inter and intra sentential
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

types of code switching to engage with students, to translate some concepts, explain, and manage
students' behaviour and to advise or encourage students. Regarding structural discourse strategies,
the study shows that lecturers notably use discourse markers so and now as cohesive devices,
marking such textual functions as framing, linking and showing consequential relationships. They
use the discourse markers so and now to achieve similar communicative goals as those achieved
using propositional discourse strategies. In referring to themselves or their audience, they use
specific pronouns you, we, and I, to perform different functions. They use the pronoun you not
only as an interactive device, but also as an explanatory device of significance in classroom
interaction. They use the pronoun we not only as a solidarity device, but like you, also as a strong
explanatory device. They also use the pronoun I to mark speaker's knowledge and his or her
stance about it, and speaker's circumstance and experience.

This study not only describes generic features and language practices in big lectures; it also
engages critically with some of the established practices and in so doing adds to the literature on
individual and societal multilingualism and how lecturers manage it in an African higher
education context.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

vi

OPSOMMING

Hierdie is 'n studie van die wyses waarop talige superdiversiteit binne 'n konteks van hoër
onderwys in Tanzanië bestuur word. Meer spesifiek, word aandag gegee aan die gebruik van tale
gedurende lesings vir groot klasse wat bestaan uit studente met talig diverse agtergronde. Met
inagneming van die veeltaligheid van die studente sowel as die dosente, asook 'n taal-in-onderrig-
beleid wat Engels as die taal van onderrig en leer voorskryf, stel die studie belang in die
persepsies en praktyke van diegene wat groot getalle studente in groot lesinglokale onderrig.

Die studie is kwalitatief dáárin dat dit gewerk het met 'n beperkte aantal opnames van lesings en
van onderhoude met die dosente wie se klasse opgeneem is. Die bedoeling was om die mees
opvallende interaksionele strategieë wat by die Universiteit van Dar es Salaam aangewend word,
te identifiseer, te beskryf, te dokumenteer en ook te analiseer. Veral is gekyk na die
diskoersstrategieë wat dosente gebruik om nuwe inligting op 'n redelik gesofistikeerde vlak van
akademiese retoriek oor te dra, en om interaksie tussen die dosent en die studentegehoor te
fasiliteer. Die generiese eienskappe van hierdie lesings is geïdentifiseer deur die hele reeks
opnames na te gaan. Die groot getal studente in die gehoor en die gegewe dat hulle
eerstetaalsprekers van 'n verskeidenheid verskillende gemeenskapstale is, sal dosente
noodwendig, bewustelik of onbewustelik, interessante taalkeuses maak. Die feit dat beide Engels
en Swahili amptelike tale in Tanzanië is, dat die meerderheid studente vlot sprekers van Swahili
is, selfs al het hulle hulle hoërskoolonderrig deur die medium van Engels ontvang, lei tot die
aannames dat (i) Swahili 'n sterk lingua franca tussen sprekers van verskillende eerstetale is, en
(ii) voortgesette hoër onderrig deur die medium van Engels onproblematies behoort te wees.

Die benaderings van Gespreksanalise (GA) en Diskoersanalise (DA) het die identifikasie en
analise van gesprekseienskappe en diskursiewe eienskappe van lesings as deel van die gesproke
registers wat generies in universiteitsonderrig gebruik word, gefasiliteer. Die analise het veral in
die talige diversiteit van die deelnemers in die konteks van hoër onderrig in Tanzanië en in die
wyse waarop die dosente vir hierdie diversiteit voorsiening maak, belanggestel. Die deelnemers
aan hierdie studie was agt dosente, vier elk uit twee departemente met die hoogste studentetal by
die Kollege van Kuns en Sosiale Wetenskappe van die Universiteit, naamlik die Departement
Politieke Wetenskap en Publieke Administrasie en die Departement Sosiologie en Sosiale
Antropologie.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

vii

Die bevindinge dui daarop dat dosente gereeld en generies 'n telbare aantal proposisionele en
strukturele diskoersstrategieë gedurende lesings gebruik. Die drie mees opvallende proposisionele
diskoersstrategieë is herhaling, die gebruik van vrae en die gebruik van kodewisseling tussen
Engels en Swahili. Dosente gebruik frase- sowel as klousherhaling om kohesie, kontinuïteit van
die onderwerp en klem te bewerkstellig. Hulle gebruik einddeel-, retoriese en oop en geslote tipe
vrae om begrip te toets, om 'n hoër denkvlak te stimuleer, om die gedrag in die klaskamer te
beheer, asook om die studente se deelname en onafhanklike studie aan te moedig. Hulle gebruik
ook kodewisseling binne en tussen sinne ten einde nouer met die studente te skakel, sekere
konsepte te vertaal, studente se optrede te verduidelik, te vertaal en te beheer en studente te
adviseer of aan te moedig. Betreffende die strukturele diskoersstrategieë toon die studie aan dat
die diskoersmerkers so en now wyd deur dosente gebruik word as kohesiemeganismes wat
tekstuele funksies soos raming, skakeling en oorsaaklike verhoudinge aandui. Hulle wend die
diskoersmerkers so en now aan om dieselfde kommunikatiewe doelwitte te bereik as dié wat
bereik is met die gebruik van proposisionele diskoersstrategieë. In verwysing na hulleself of die
toehoorders, span hulle spesifiek die voornaamwoorde you, we en I in om verskillende
referensiële funksies of aanspreek funksies te verrig. Die voornaamwoord you word nie slegs as
'n interaktiewe meganisme gebruik nie, maar ook as 'n beduidende verklarende meganisme in
klaskamer interaksie. Hulle gebruik die voornaamwoord we nie net as 'n samehorigheids-
meganisme nie, maar ook, soos you, as 'n sterk verklarende meganisme. Hulle gebruik ook die
voornaamwoord I om sprekerskennis te merk en sy/haar houding daaromtrent uit te druk, asook
die spreker se omstandighede en ervaring.

In die analise word aandag gegee aan relevante aspekte van tweetalige onderrig, die gebruik van
Engels as 'n lingua franca, en die verskynsel van kodewisseling in akademiese diskoers binne 'n
veeltalige onderrigkonteks. Die studie beskryf nie alleen generiese eienskappe en taalpraktyke in
groot groep lesings nie; dit oorweeg ook sekere gevestigde gebruike in groot lesings dra daarmee
by tot die literatuur oor invividuele en gemeenskaplike veeltaligheid en hoe dit hanteer word deur
dosente in 'n hoër onderwyskonteks in Afrika.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION............................................................................................................................................. i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................................... ii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................... iv
OPSOMMING.............................................................................................................................................. vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................................................................viii
LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................................... xvi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................................... xvii
LIST OF ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................. xviii
LIST OF KEY TERMS ............................................................................................................................... xix

Chapter One
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1

1.1 BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE ..................................................................................... 1


1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ....................................................................................... 3
1.3 RESEARCH AIM, OBJECTIVES AND QUESTIONS ...................................................... 4
1.3.1 Research aim..................................................................................................................... 4
1.3.2 Research objectives.......................................................................................................... 4
1.3.3 Research questions........................................................................................................... 4
1.4 LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY IN TANZANIA.......................................................................... 5
1.4.1 Kiswahili in Tanzania ..................................................................................................... 5
1.4.2 English in Tanzania ......................................................................................................... 7
1.5 LANGUAGE POLICY AND LANGUAGE-IN-EDUCATION POLICY IN
TANZANIA .................................................................................................................................... 8
1.5.1 The language of classroom interaction in Higher Education in Tanzania........... 9
1.5.1.1 Language policy ................................................................................................ 9
1.5.1.2 Status and use of English at the University of Dar es Salaam ................. 10
1.5.1.3 Status and use of Kiswahili at the University of Dar es Salaam .............. 10
1.5.1.4 Language choice and code switching at the University of Dar es
Salaam .............................................................................................................. 11
1.5.2 The language of classroom interaction ...................................................................... 13
1.5.2.1 Classroom interaction as institutional talk .................................................. 13
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

ix

1.5.2.2 Classifying and analysing classroom discourse ..................................... 14


1.5.2.3 Functions of classroom discourse ................................................................ 15
1.5.2.4 Primacy of classroom discourse.................................................................... 15
1.5.2.5 Analysing classroom discourse ..................................................................... 16
1.5.2.6 Purposes of analysing classroom discourse ................................................ 16
1.5.2.7 The language of classroom interaction as a structured experience ........ 17
1.5.2.8 Reasons for analysing classroom discourse in Tanzania ......................... 17
1.5.3 Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis ....................................................... 18
1.5.3.1 The term 'conversation'.................................................................................. 18
1.5.3.2 The terms 'discourse' and 'discourse types' ................................................ 19
1.5.3.3 Distinguishing between discourse and conversation ................................. 19
1.5.4 Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis ....................................................... 19
1.6 RESEARCH PARADIGM, DESIGN AND METHODS...................................................20
1.6.1 Research paradigm........................................................................................................ 20
1.6.2 Research design .............................................................................................................. 20
1.6.3 Research methodology .................................................................................................. 21
1.7 THESIS OUTLINE ....................................................................................................................22

Chapter Two
LITERATURE RELEVANT TO RESEARCH OF FEATURES OF HIGHER
EDUCATION LECTURES IN TANZANIA ........................................................... 25

2.0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 25


2.1 CONVERSATION ANALYSIS .............................................................................................. 26
2.1.1 Definitions of the term 'conversation' ........................................................................ 26
2.1.2 Definitions of 'conversational features' ..................................................................... 26
2.1.3 Conversation Analysis as theoretical framework.................................................... 27
2.1.3.1 History of Conversation Analysis ................................................................. 27
2.1.3.2 Theoretical contribution of Conversation Analysis ................................... 28
2.2 DISCOURSE ANALYSIS......................................................................................................... 29
2.2.1 Definitions of Discourse ................................................................................................ 30
2.2.2 Definitions of discursive features ................................................................................ 31
2.2.3 Discourse Types .............................................................................................................. 32
2.2.4 Discourse Analysis as theoretical framework .......................................................... 33
2.2.4.1 History............................................................................................................... 33
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

2.2.4.2 Theoretical Contribution of Discourse Analysis in the study of


language use .................................................................................................... 34
2.2.4.3 Purpose of Discourse Analysis ...................................................................... 34
2.2.4.4 Value of Discourse Analysis .......................................................................... 35
2.2.5 Studying discourse strategies ....................................................................................... 35
2.2.5.1 Defining discourse strategies......................................................................... 36
2.2.5.2 Macro level ....................................................................................................... 36
2.2.5.3 Micro level ........................................................................................................ 37
2.2.5.4 Specific studies on discourse strategies ........................................................ 38
2.3 CONVERSATION ANALYSIS AND DISCOURSE ANALYSIS IN
INVESTIGATING ACADEMIC DISCOURSE ................................................................. 38
2.4 CLASSROOM INTERACTION AS DISCOURSE TYPE ............................................... 40
2.4.1 The University lecture as discourse type ................................................................... 40
2.4.2 The language of classroom interaction as an Academic Discourse ..................... 41
2.4.3 Organisation of Discourse and of Academic Discourse ......................................... 41
2.4.4 Coherence in Discourse and Academic Discourse .................................................. 42
2.4.5 Cohesive devices in Discourse and Academic Discourse ....................................... 43
2.4.6 Discourse Markers ......................................................................................................... 43
2.4.7 Contextual cohesive devices in Discourse and Academic Discourse ................... 44
2.4.8 Analysing classroom discourse.................................................................................... 44
2.4.8.1 Historical account ........................................................................................... 45
2.4.8.2 Research on classroom discourse ................................................................. 45
2.4.8.3 The structure of classroom discourse........................................................... 46
2.4.8.4 Functions of classroom discourse ................................................................ 47
2.5 BILINGUALISM AND BILINGUAL EDUCATION........................................................ 48
2.5.1 Bilingualism..................................................................................................................... 49
2.5.2 Bilingual Education ....................................................................................................... 49
2.5.3 Models of bilingual education...................................................................................... 51
2.5.3.1 Immersion Bilingual Education ................................................................... 52
2.5.3.2 Submersion Bilingual Education ................................................................. 52
2.5.3.3 Transitional Bilingual Education................................................................. 53
2.5.3.4 Maintenance Bilingual Education ............................................................... 53
2.5.3.5 Enrichment Bilingual Education ................................................................. 53
2.5.3.6 English as Second Language (ESL) Pullout and the
ESL Sheltered Model...................................................................................... 54
2.6 ENGLISH AS LINGUA FRANCA (ELF) ............................................................................ 56
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

xi

2.6.1 History and definition ................................................................................................... 56


2.6.2 Influence of English as lingua franca ......................................................................... 57
2.6.3 Interest in English as Lingua Franca ......................................................................... 57
2.6.4 Studies on English as Lingua Franca......................................................................... 58
2.6.5 English as a lingua franca in academic discourse ................................................... 59
2.7 REPETITION AS PRACTICE IN CLASSROOM COMMUNICATION................... 60
2.8 QUESTIONING AS A PRACTICE IN CLASSROOM COMMUNICATION........... 61
2.9 CODE SWITCHING AS PRACTICE IN BILINGUAL COMMUNICATION.......... 62
2.9.1 Types of Code switching ............................................................................................... 63
2.9.1.1 Situational code switching ............................................................................. 63
2.9.1.2 Conversational code switching...................................................................... 63
2.9.2 Code switching in academic discourse....................................................................... 64
2.9.3 Types of code switching ................................................................................................ 65
2.9.4 Reasons for code switching .......................................................................................... 65
2.10 SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 66

Chapter Three
RESEARCH PARADIGM, DESIGN
AND METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................. 67

3.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 67


3.2 RESEARCH PARADIGM ....................................................................................................... 67
3.2.1 Meaning of the term research paradigm .................................................................. 67
3.2.2 Functions of research paradigms................................................................................ 68
3.2.3 Types of research paradigms....................................................................................... 68
3.2.4 Distinction of research paradigms .............................................................................. 69
3.3 THE PRESENT STUDY ........................................................................................................... 70
3.4 RESEARCH DESIGN ............................................................................................................... 71
3.4.1 Definition ......................................................................................................................... 71
3.4.2 Case study research design .......................................................................................... 72
3.4.2.1 The nature of case study research design .................................................... 72
3.4.2.2 Application of case study research design ................................................... 73
3.5 POPULATION, SAMPLE AND SAMPLING PROCEDURE ........................................ 75
3.5.1 Population........................................................................................................................ 75
3.5.2 Sample and sampling procedure ................................................................................ 75
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

xii

3.5.3 Data collection................................................................................................................. 76


3.5.3.1 Schedule ........................................................................................................... 76
3.5.3.2 Sets of data for the study ................................................................................ 77
3.5.3.3 Type of interview ............................................................................................. 78
3.5.3.4 The reason for using a qualitative interview technique ............................ 78
3.5.3.5 Setting for the interviews ................................................................................ 79
3.5.4 The profile of each of the research participants that participated
in this study...................................................................................................................... 79
3.5.4.1 LPsc.1................................................................................................................ 79
3.5.4.2 LSoc.1 ............................................................................................................... 80
3.5.4.3 LSoc.2 ............................................................................................................... 80
3.5.4.4 LPsc.2................................................................................................................ 80
3.5.4.5 LSoc.3 ............................................................................................................... 81
3.5.4.6 LSoc.4 ............................................................................................................... 81
3.5.4.7 LPsc.3................................................................................................................ 81
3.5.4.8 LPsc.4................................................................................................................ 82
3.5.5 Data processing and analysis ....................................................................................... 82
3.5.5.1 Sources of data ................................................................................................ 83
3.5.5.2 Transcription ................................................................................................... 83
3.5.5.3 Organisation of the transcripts...................................................................... 83
3.5.6 Coding of data................................................................................................................. 84
3.5.6.1 Propositional discourse strategies................................................................. 84
3.5.6.2 Structural discourse strategies ...................................................................... 85
3.5.7 Data interpretation ........................................................................................................ 85
3.6 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................ 86
3.7 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY .......................................................................................... 86
3.7.1 Environmental limitations ........................................................................................... 86
3.7.2 Methodological limitations ........................................................................................... 87
3.8 SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 88

Chapter Four
ANALYSIS OF DISCOURSE
STRATEGIES IN LECTURES .................................................................................. 89

4.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 89


4.2 PROPOSITIONAL DISCOURSE STRATEGIES ............................................................. 92
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

xiii

4.2.1 Exemplifying repetition in lectures ............................................................................ 93


4.2.2 Categorising repetition in lectures .............................................................................. 96
4.2.2.1 Clausal Repetition ........................................................................................... 96
4.2.2.2 Phrasal Repetition ........................................................................................... 97
4.2.3 Exemplifying use of questions in lectures.................................................................. 99
4.2.4 Categorising use of questions in lectures .................................................................102
4.2.4.1 Tag questions .................................................................................................103
4.2.4.2 Rhetorical questions .....................................................................................104
4.2.4.3 Closed ended questions.................................................................................106
4.2.5 Exemplifying code switching in lectures .................................................................108
4.2.6 Categorising code switching in lectures ...................................................................112
4.2.6.1 Intra sentential code-switching ...................................................................112
4.2.6.2 Inter sentential code-switching ...................................................................113
4.2.7 Lecturers' motivation for use of discourse strategies ...........................................115
4.2.7.1 Lecturers' motivation for use of repetition in lectures .............................115
4.2.7.2 Lecturers facilitate classroom interaction .................................................117
4.2.7.3 Lecturers motivation for code switching in lectures ................................119
4.2.8 Lecturers motivation for use of other strategies ....................................................120
4.2.8.1 Views on students' proficiency related challenges ...................................121
4.2.8.2 Lecturers' intervention .................................................................................121
4.2.8.3 Lecturers' views on LoI ................................................................................122
4.2.8.4 Change of strategies due to class level and effectiveness
of strategies.....................................................................................................124
4.3 STRUCTURAL DISCOURSE STRATEGIES..................................................................125
4.3.1 Defining and exemplifying discourse markers so and now .................................126
4.3.2 Characterising the discourse markers so and now in lecture discourse ...........128
4.3.2.1 Discourse marker so .....................................................................................128
4.3.2.2 The discourse marker now...........................................................................129
4.3.3 Defining and exemplifying the use of pronouns ....................................................131
4.3.4 Characterising specific pronouns as structural discourse markers ..................132
4.3.4.1 The pronoun you...........................................................................................132
4.3.4.2 The pronoun we ............................................................................................135
4.3.4.3 The first person pronoun I...........................................................................136
4.4 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................138
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

xiv

Chapter Five

DISCUSSION AND REFLECTIONS..................................................................... 140

5.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................140


5.2 BILINGUALISM AND BILINGUAL HIGHER EDUCATION...................................141
5.2.1 Bilingualism and Multilingualism in education in Tanzania ..............................143
5.2.2 Advantages and disadvantages of bilingualism .....................................................144
5.3 ENGLISH LINGUA FRANCA AS LANGUAGE OF INSTRUCTION IN
TANZANIA ................................................................................................................................146
5.4 THE LANGUAGE OF CLASSROOM INTERACTION IN LECTURES
AS A DISCOURSE TYPE ......................................................................................................148
5.4.1 The lecture mode of instruction ................................................................................149
5.4.2 Advantages and disadvantages of the lecture mode of instruction....................150
5.4.2.1 Advantages of the lecture mode of instruction .........................................151
5.4.2.2 Disadvantages of the lecture mode of instruction ....................................151
5.4.3 The lecture mode of teaching in Higher Education in Tanzania .......................152
5.4.4 Active learning as alternative mode of instruction in higher
education ........................................................................................................................154
5.4.4.1 Collaborative learning ..................................................................................154
5.4.4.2 The Peer Assisted learning mode................................................................155
5.4.4.3 The seminar mode
5.4.4.4 The discussion mode.....................................................................................156
5.4.4.5 The use of practical examples mode...........................................................157
5.5 LECTURERS' CLASSROOM STRATEGIES IN TEACHING
BIG GROUPS ............................................................................................................................157
5.5.1 Use of questions ............................................................................................................158
5.5.2 Code switching..............................................................................................................159
5.5.3 Discourse markers .......................................................................................................160
5.5.4 Pronouns ........................................................................................................................160
5.5.5 Use of the black or white board ................................................................................161
5.5.6 Use of practical examples ...........................................................................................162
5.6 CONCLUSION..........................................................................................................................168
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

xv

Chapter Six

CONCLUSION, SUMMARY
AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................. 169

6.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................169


6.2 DATA ...........................................................................................................................................169
6.3 THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS .................................170
6.4 FINDINGS ..................................................................................................................................172
6.5 POLICY IMPLICATIONS ....................................................................................................173
6.6 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................174
6.7 CONCLUSION..........................................................................................................................174

BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................................................................................ 176
Appendix A: INTERVIEW SCHEDULE FOR SELECTED LECTURERS ........................198

Appendix B: INFORMED CONSENT FORM .............................................................................200

Appendix C: ETHICS REVIEW REPORT ...................................................................................203


Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

xvi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1: Results on the use of Propositional Discourse Strategies by lecturers ............................. 92
Table 4.2: Most frequently used structural discourse markers in the lectures .................................126
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

xvii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Cl. = Clausal

CS = Code-switching

Phr. = Phrasal

Prn. = Pronoun

Qn. = Questioning

Rptn. = Repetition
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

xviii

LIST OF ACRONYMS

CCE = Centre for Continuing Education

CSU = Communication Skills Unit

DM = Discourse Marker(s)

DS = Discourse Strategies

ELF = English as Lingua Franca

ELTSP = English Language Teaching Support Project

IRE = Initiation Response Evaluation

IRF = Initiation Response Feedback

LoI = Language of Instruction

NGOs = Non-Governmental Organisations

NL = National Language

NORAD = Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation

ONL = Official National Language

PDS = Propositional Discourse Strategies

QAB = Quality Assurance Bureau

SDS = Structural Discourse Strategies

TANU = Tanganyika African National Union

UDSM = University of Dar es Salaam

URT = United Republic of Tanzania


Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

xix

LIST OF KEY TERMS

bilingualism

bilingual education

bilingual education models

classroom interaction

code-switching

conversation

conversation analysis

discourse

discourse analysis

discourse markers

discourse strategies

English as lingua franca

higher education

lecture method

lingua franca

multilingualism

pronouns

questioning

repetition

Tanzania

University of Dar es Salaam


Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

Chapter One

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE

This study addresses aspects of discourse structure in a multilingual tertiary education institution in
Tanzania. It specifically focuses on the University of Dar es Salaam, because there has not been any
exploratory or systematic linguistic analysis of the language of classroom interaction at the
university in order to identify, analyse, describe and document interactional strategies that transpire.
As a result, we do not know what Discourse Strategies the lecturers of the University of Dar es
Salaam use to facilitate classroom interaction. Altmayer (2009:101) has indicated that research into
the use of various languages in multilingual classrooms in Africa, as elsewhere, so far lacks
empirical evidence that will clarify how policy and practice actually meet. This dissertation will
address exactly that need. Studies on Language of Instruction in Tanzania report on issues related
to language policy (cf. Mwinsheikhe, 2009; Rubagumya et al., 2008; 1998; Vuzo, 2005; Mlama &
Matteru, 1978) without attending to purely pragmatic linguistic issues such as how the discourse of
the classroom interaction is organised to facilitate classroom communication and learning. There is
scant attention to pedagogical issues such as how lecturers draw on their own and students' language
skills in delivering the content of the subjects they are teaching.

Tanzania counts among the highly linguistically diversified countries in the world with more than
120 spoken languages (Muzale & Rugemalira, 2008; Ethnologue, 2005; Mafu, 2004). Tanzania is
also one of the few countries that promote the use of an indigenous African language (Kiswahili) as
the language of instruction up to the completion of primary school and at certain levels in Teacher
Training. However, the planning for and the choice of Language of Instruction (LoI) in the country
has been a remarkably complex process. The complexity of the process, as is the case for many
post-colonial countries, has been attributed to ratification of weakly conceptualised language
policies in the country. For instance, shortly after independence, from 1961 to 1967, the government
endorsed the use of Kiswahili as LoI from grade one to grade seven. Accordingly, the government
also proclaimed its intention to develop conditions for use of Kiswahili in teaching up to tertiary
level; plans that never were implemented. Instead, in 1995, the government endorsed a new
education and training policy, which paved the way for the establishment of privately owned
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

International schools or Academies. Many people choose to send their children to these schools
rather than to the government schools because of the utilitarian benefits that English apparently has
(Qorro, 2009).

Since 1995, the decision about LoI in such private schools or academies lies in the hands of
individuals, mostly school owners and parents. This trend has resulted in a discrepancy in English
language proficiency between children who attend International schools or Academies and those
who attend public schools. Financially strong individuals or Non-Governmental Organisations
(NGOs) own most of the International schools or Academies, thus they can recruit well-qualified
teachers and can afford fairly advanced teaching and learning facilities. This is said to account for
superior English proficiency of their graduates in comparison to their counterparts from public
schools. The expectation this raises is that first year students from public secondary schools would
have lower English proficiency and would be less prepared for tertiary level learning. However,
graduates from International schools or Academies and public schools meet in the same classes at
university and, until now, there is no established difference in their academic progress that can
decisively be correlated with their particular schooling background. Studies elsewhere (such as
South Africa) have established a measurable difference in performance of students at university
level that reflects learners' schooling background (see Leibowitz, 2005). For Tanzania, research that
can confirm or contest the effect on academic success of access to English before entry into higher
education, is not existent yet.

Studies conducted on the LoI in Tanzania are mainly about policy and policy implications on
primary and secondary education (cf. Brock-Utne et al., 2006; Galabawa & Senkoro, 2006; Dachi,
2006; Tilya, 2006; Qorro & Roy-Campbell, 1997). Even those that somehow focus on actual
classroom interaction mainly focus on the perceived incompetence of teachers and students in their
use of the English language of the classroom (cf. Tibategeza, 2010; Mwinsheikhe, 2009;
Rubagumya, 2008; Brock-Utne et al., 2006; Qorro & Roy-Campbell, 1997).

The issue of LoI in higher learning in Tanzania is historically a matter of much debate. Qorro and
Roy-Campbell (1997) report serious concern in both public and professional sectors since the mid
1970s over the falling standards of English language proficiency among secondary and post-
secondary school students in the country. Complaints about the reduced English language
proficiency of undergraduate students were noted by lecturers at the University of Dar es Salaam as
well as by external examiners. Lecturers objected to having to spend more time teaching English
language skills instead of their subject matter.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

In response to this concern, the Ministry of Education and the University of Dar es Salaam devised
some intervention measures. On the part of the ministry, one such measure was the launching of the
British Council supported English Language Teaching Support Project (ELTSP) in the 1980s. The
project was aimed at promoting a reading programme to improve English language reading ability
in Tanzanian secondary schools. It involved the introduction of a training programme for secondary
school English subject teachers. The training was conducted in both Tanzania and England.
Nevertheless, the project did not deliver any significant improvement in students' language skills
(Qorro & Roy-Campbell, 1997:109).

On the part of the University of Dar es Salaam, a Communication Skills Unit (CSU) was established
in 1978. The unit was introduced to assist first year students with language-related learning
difficulties. However, as Qorro and Roy-Campbell (1997) report, the CSU also had limited success.
The kinds of difficulties that were identified seemed to need more than the sixty hours per year
allocated for the Communication Skills course to first year students. Recently, the University of Dar
es Salaam, through the Department of Foreign Languages and Linguistics, has launched a two-
month project funded by the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD) to help
first year students with English language-related learning difficulties. The impact of this project has
not been evaluated yet. Additionally, the University has established a Quality Assurance Bureau
(QAB) to monitor and evaluate, among other things, the teaching and learning process at its
campuses. This is done through a subsection of the QAB, namely the Centre for Continuing
Education (CCE). The topics under scrutiny with a view to improved teaching and learning include
teaching methods for lecturers and writing skills for both lecturers and students. All these
interventions imply awareness, if not open recognition, of a notable problem concerning the
language of classroom interaction at all levels of learning in Tanzania. Most stakeholders in the
issue of LoI- in Tanzania have at one occasion or another expressed their concern about languages
in learning, not only about perceived lowering standards of English, but also about the way in which
language difficulties affect learning in specific academic disciplines. To demonstrate the
pervasiveness of the debate about the LoI issue in Tanzania, Qorro (2009) laments:

It is not easy to talk of new ideas when discussing the language-in-education or the language-of-instruction
issue, since for almost 50 years African countries such as Tanzania have been debating this issue, with the
debate almost going stale at times (Qorro, 2009:58).
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

This study takes a linguistic and practice-oriented approach to establish the discourse strategies that
university lecturers actually use in classroom communication. It intends to investigate what
strategies lecturers use in order to ascertain what kinds of discourse patterns best characterise the
current teaching and learning process in a number of higher education lectures to big groups of
students. Such information on interactional behaviour of lecturers in the Higher Education
classrooms of Tanzania will assist in answering questions related to the exploitation of
multilingualism even when English is the only official language of instruction.

1.3 RESEARCH AIM, OBJECTIVES AND QUESTIONS

1.3.1 Research aim

This study aims to identify the discourse strategies that the lecturers of the University of Dar es
Salaam use during classroom interaction, in order to categorise them in terms of their occurrence
patterns in bilingual tertiary education. Specifically, attention goes to strategies used in lectures to
facilitate the learning of multilingual students for whom the language of learning is not their first
language. Although as from the beginning of secondary school (thus from Form 1), English is the
only LoI in Tanzania, for the overwhelming majority it is not a home language nor otherwise used
in informal interaction. Batibo (1995) reported that only 5% of Tanzanians speak English
proficiently.

1.3.2 Research objectives

To achieve the aim of the study, four objectives were targeted:

(i) To identify and describe discourse strategies used by lecturers at the University of Dar es
Salaam during classroom interaction;

(ii) To describe how and how widely the various strategies are used by the lecturers during
classroom interaction;

(iii) To establish the reasons for the lecturers' use of such strategies during classroom interaction;
and

(iv) To reflect on the use of the most prominent strategies used in lectures in terms of their likely
functionality in facilitating learning.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

1.3.3 Research questions

The overriding research question that this study sought to answer in order to achieve the research
objectives was "what Discourse Strategies do lecturers of the University of Dar es Salaam use; how,
how widely and why are the various strategies used?" In order to answer this question fully, four sub
questions were articulated:

(i) What discourse strategies do the lecturers of the University of Dar es Salaam use during
lectures?

(ii) How and how widely do the lecturers use the various discourse strategies identified in
question 1, during lectures?

(iii) Why do the lecturers use the various discourse strategies during classroom interaction?

(iv) How effective are the various strategies likely to be in terms of facilitating the learning of the
particular community of multilingual students at the University of Dar es Salaam ?

1.4 LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY IN TANZANIA

Tanzania, as is the case with many African countries, is an extremely linguistically diversified
country. It is difficult to determine the actual number of indigenous languages in the country. This
has not yet been finally established, but the numbers seem to grow as more people investigate the
linguistic variety from many different perspectives. For instance, the numbered list of languages has
changed from 120 (Rubagumya, 1991), through 127 (Ethnologue, 2005) and 130 (Mafu, 2004) to
the most recent report of 150 different languages (Tibategeza, 2010; Muzale & Rugemalira, 2008).
Despite this discrepancy in the documentation of the languages of Tanzania, the fact is that among
all those languages Kiswahili is the only one that has been privileged to play role in the education
system of the country. Moreover, the language is spoken by over 95% of the more than 35 million
population of Tanzania as either first or second language. Used widely as a lingua franca, it
developed a unifying function in the years before independence, that is, before 1961. Since then it
has been awarded the status of National Language (NL) of Tanzania (Brock-Utne, 2007). The
position of Kiswahili and English are central to understanding language-in-education in Tanzania.
Therefore, more information on these two languages in the country is required, as is given below.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

1.4.1 Kiswahili in Tanzania

The history of the development of Kiswahili is that it developed as a national lingua franca due to a
number of roles it was assigned before, during and after the colonial era in Tanzania. Anderson
(1983) notes that Arabs were the first foreigners to come into contact with inhabitants of the East
African coast and that they introduced Islam, and educated young men and women in Madrassa
schools where they taught Islamic religion and culture in Arabic script. Kiswahili developed as a
contact language between Arabic traders and speakers of other languages in the region. Later
European missionaries elaborated Kiswahili, the indigenous language of the coast, which had
already borrowed significantly from other languages such as Arabic, Hindi and English. Since
education had already been provided in Arabic, when Kiswahili was first written it was in Arabic
script. Anderson (1983) further notes that the opening of a printing press by missionaries led to
standardisation of local languages because of the need of translating scriptures into local languages.
The missionaries also wrote Kiswahili grammars and compiled Kiswahili dictionaries.

Mafu (2004:57) reports that during the colonial period in Tanzania, that is, during both German and
British rule, Kiswahili functioned as lingua franca for administrative communication. Official
documentation of governmental departments was first in German only and after the British take-
over, in English only. During the German rule (1880-1918), Kiswahili functioned as LoI, language
of administration and religion for indigenous populations. The British rule (1918-1961), introduced
a tripartite racial education system by which Kiswahili functioned as LoI in African schools while
English functioned as LoI in European and Asian schools. Although this opportunity of Kiswahili
being used throughout the colonial administration was meant to facilitate contact between the ruler
and the ruled, it paved way for Kiswahili to start attaining the status of lingua franca quite early in
the 20th century. When the Tanganyika African National Union (TANU) party started the struggles
for the independence of Tanganyika, Kiswahili was adopted as a language of politics for unifying
the disparate groups not only during the run-up to independence, but also later after independence of
the former Tanganyika (Mafu, 2004:57).

Furthermore, Mkilifi (1972:201) notes that, although a strong emphasis was placed on teaching
English to African students in secondary schools, they had no opportunity for a free interaction with
native speakers of English because they were segregated due to the policy of racial
compartmentalisation. Since the schools were boarding schools, the African students resorted to
Kiswahili in settings requiring informal, slang, colloquial or affective socialisation. Consequently,
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

Kiswahili continued to be the basis of affective socialisation inside and outside school despite there
being regulations insisting on the use of English only.

Mafu (2004:58) describes three social practices that promoted the development of Kiswahili as a
national lingua franca after the independence of Tanganyika. The first was President Nyerere's
Socialism policy of 1967 by which rural people were resettled to live together in 'Socialist' villages
with the aim to facilitate collective agricultural production and easy provision of social services. The
second was the increasing migration of rural people to urban areas in search of employment because
of industrialisation and or urbanisation. The third was the deliberate practice of the government to
discourage the use of the wide variety of indigenous languages in education and administration.
Thus, Kiswahili was supported with the aim to promote national unity. These three practices
enabled contact and communication among people with varying linguistic backgrounds who then
needed a common language of interaction; a role that only Kiswahili could play.

1.4.2 English in Tanzania

During the 20th century, English enjoyed more economic, political and social support than
Kiswahili, which ultimately contributed to its establishment as official language and its wide use as
lingua franca in public spaces before Tanzania's independence. For example, during the British
colonial period (1918-1961) English was LoI in the entire educational system except in the first four
years of primary education in schools attended by African learners (Rubagumya, 1991:74). It was
highly valued and the school system did whatever was possible to promote it by praising those few
Africans who could speak it well and admonishing those who could not (Rubagumya, 1991:74).
During that period, there were even plans to remove Kiswahili from the curriculum on the claim that
it was standing in the way of the strong development of English (Cameron & Dodd, 1970:110). In
1982, the government of Tanzania brought in a rather astonishing arrangement when they rejected
an earlier proposal of the Presidential Commission on Education intended at extending the use of
Kiswahili into secondary schooling, and decided to support continued use of English as the LoI.
They claimed that Tanzanians had to learn from foreign nations, and presumed that English is the
only language that can facilitate learning in such globalising circumstances (Rubagumya, 1991:75).

Other factors that contributed to the establishment of English as official language alongside
Kiswahili in Tanzania include the acceptance of the conditions accompanied by the IMF loan
awarded to Tanzania in 1986. Those conditions were liberalisation of economy and devaluation of
currency. The belief was that economic recovery would go hand in hand with the raising of the
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

standards of English (Rubagumya, 1991:75). This is the period when projects such as ELTSP were
launched. However, neither the economic liberalisation nor the liberalisation of English achieved
the intended goal (Rubagumya, 1991:76). The value of English in Tanzania can therefore be
described under the concept of 'symbolic value' (Bourdieu, 1977). By this concept, we can say that
English in Tanzania has a good market with resultant high demand in public spaces, while Kiswahili
has a reduced market with resultant low demand in public spaces. The enhancement of the symbolic
value of English in Tanzania is manifested by its continued use in secondary schools, the launching
of ELTSP for secondary school level, the establishment of CSU, NORAD fund; QAB and CCE at
the University of Dar es Salaam.

Moreover, English was announced as a co-official language to be taught as a compulsory subject at


primary school level when, in 1967, Kiswahili was declared Official and National Language (ONL)
of Tanzania. Mkilifi (1972:201) established that in secondary schools, at the time, teachers who
were mostly native speakers of English provided rigorous English instruction. Moreover, it was
often used as LoI, even in the teaching of Kiswahili. Mastering English was regarded as a yardstick
for one's academic performance generally, because it had become established as a language of
learning. Later, at post-secondary level, Kiswahili was used complementary to English, giving rise
to code switching and code mixing between the two languages according to requirements of
different cultural settings (Mkilifi, 1972:202).

1.5 LANGUAGE POLICY AND LANGUAGE-IN-EDUCATION POLICY IN TANZANIA

With regard to language policy and language-in-education policy in Tanzania, there have been
many contradictions in the ratification of the policies and their implementation. In the language
policy of 1995, Kiswahili was proclaimed to be used as LoI from pre-primary to end of primary
education, while English would continue to be used as LoI in secondary schools through to tertiary
level. Some scholars have called the language-in-education policy in Tanzania dualistic (Kimizi,
2008); others refer to it as contradictory (Swilla, 2009). Swilla (2009:2) identifies three ideological
periods in relation to language-in-education policy in Tanzania. The first period is the first five years
after independence (1961-1966) in which Tanzania continued a Capitalist form of government that
it had inherited from the previous regime. The second is the period between 1967 and the early
1980s in which Tanzania adopted Socialism as a form of government. The third is the period from
the late 1980s up to the present in which Tanzania returned to Capitalism. All these ideological
changes have had a significant impact on the language in education policy in Tanzania as explicated
below.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

In the first period (1961-1966), the government made significant changes to the former colonial
system, including the abolishing of school fees for secondary school education with the aim of
allowing wider access for African learners. However, Swilla (2009:3) notes, the government
maintained the colonial curriculum and LoI policy whereby Kiswahili continued to be used as LoI
in the first years of primary education and English continued to be used as LoI from the sixth year of
primary education through secondary school up to post-secondary school level.

In the second period (1967-mid 1980s), the government nationalised all the major means of
production in the country. The Education for Self Reliance policy was adopted and the government
promised free provision of social services including education. At this stage, Kiswahili was adopted
as LoI for the entire primary school education. A small number of English medium primary schools
were maintained to cater for children of expatriates. However, these schools were not allowed to
enrol Tanzanian learners (Swilla, 2009:3).

In the third period, Socialism was gradually abandoned, though it is still officially included in the
Tanzanian constitution. This was mainly due to economic pressures that the government had
experienced in the late 1970s due to rising oil prices, the falling prices of raw materials on the world
market, drought, famine and the war against Idi Amin of Uganda. This necessitated a move from
state controlled to free market economy that entailed liberalisation and privatisation of major means
of production and state owned enterprises. Eventually, privatisation was re-introduced into the
education system by legalising the use of English in private primary schools in 1992 and finally, by
extending the right to use English as LoI in 1995, by means of the Education Amendment Act No.
10 of 1995 (Swilla, 2009:4).

1.5.1 The language of classroom interaction in Higher Education in Tanzania

1.5.1.1 Language policy

As Tollefson (2002:179) remarks, in multilingual societies language policies form an important tool
in mitigating potential social conflict among competing language groups. Because these language
groups have different political, economic and social motives they wish to advance, language policy
in education functions to favour some groups over others. In Tanzania, as is the case for most
countries once colonised by Britain, the language policy in higher education (HE) stipulates English
should be the only language for higher education teaching and learning. After independence, even
with growing support for the use of Kiswahili as LoI, English continued to play a role as the official
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

10

LoI in secondary and tertiary education.1 Although most of the lecturers and students of the
University of Dar es Salaam are multilingual in the languages of Tanzania including Kiswahili, the
policy states that all academic affairs should be handled in English. In practice, adherence to this
policy varies in that some individuals strictly use English only, and others are more flexible in their
language choice. This study aimed at investigating some instances in which lecturers defy policy
stipulations during classroom interaction and the reasons for the practice.

1.5.1.2 Status and use of English at the University of Dar es Salaam

As alluded to above, English has the status of LoI in HE in Tanzania by which all subjects other
than Kiswahili 2 are supposed to be taught solely in English. For example, examination questions for
all courses are a set and answered in English. Examination regulations are written in English and
examination reports and results are released in English. Moreover, all information that is
communicated to members of staff or posted on notice boards is in English. For example, all
announcements about promotion of academic members of staff, press releases, communication by
the office of the Vice-Chancellor to academic staff and students are done in English. Essentially,
English plays a great role in the academic undertakings of the University of Dar es Salaam.

1.5.1.3 Status and use of Kiswahili at the University of Dar es Salaam

Although officially, Kiswahili is not recognised as LoI beyond the Institute of Kiswahili Studies
(IKS), in practice, however, it has the status of an academic Lingua Franca in that it is often used to
facilitate teaching and learning experiences. In university administration Kiswahili has the same
status as English, thus either language (or both) can be used. Nevertheless, increasingly Kiswahili is
used as the primary medium of communication among administrative staff at the University of Dar
es Salaam. Kiswahili is used for communication about matters that are not academic per se and that
involve either administrative staff only or both academic and administrative staff.

Moreover, Kiswahili is used as LoI for all Kiswahili courses offered by the IKS from undergraduate
to postgraduate level. The past five years have seen drastic changes in the use of Kiswahili in certain
academic contexts at the University of Dar es Salaam, notably in the IKS. All post graduate
Linguistics courses in the Department of Kiswahili that used to be offered in English, jointly with
the Department of Foreign Languages and Linguistics of the University of Dar es Salaam, are now

1
As indicated earlier, a number of state owned teacher training colleges do actually use Kiswahili as LoI.
2
Thus, all courses offered in the Institute of Kiswahili Studies (IKS) are taught in Kiswahili, in the same way that French
courses will be taught in French.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

11

offered by IKS in Kiswahili. Most notable is the fact that today students are permitted to write
dissertations in Kiswahili.

Furthermore, recent developments at the University of Dar es Salaam have seen Kiswahili used in
conferences and workshops parallel with English. It is no longer mandatory to use English only in
academic gatherings because a speaker now has the liberty to choose which of the two languages
s/he prefers in preparing and delivering a presentation. The communication in the University of Dar
es Salaam Academic Staff Association (UDASA) is also done in either language.

1.5.1.4 Language choice and code switching at the University of Dar es Salaam

Essentially code switching (CS), that is using English and Kiswahili intermittently in a single
conversation, occurs in the offices, corridors and classrooms of the University of Dar es Salaam,
This is inevitable because of the multilingual context of the community members of the University
of Dar es salaam. Mkilifi (1972) describes three related and overlapping factors that influence the
mode of language maintenance and code switching among bilinguals. These are the socio-cultural
settings in which languages have been acquired and used, the purposes for which each language is
used, when speaking to whom about what, and the state of development of each language in terms
of its adequacy in situations of modernity (Mkilifi, 1972:198).

Additionally, there are two major types of code switching taking place at the university, situational
and metaphoric code switching. According to Bloom and Gumperz (2000:126) situational code
switching is done according to change in situation and metaphoric code switching is done in order to
achieve a special communicative effect. At the University of Dar es Salaam, this can be illustrated
when an academic administrator switches from English, the academically unmarked code, to
Kiswahili, the marked code. Such a switch is motivated by the fact that the university community is
made up of academic and non-academic members of staff. Among non-academic staff, use of
English is not mandatory and many probably do not have an advanced command of English.
Communicatively, the administrator imparts the sense of sharing and togetherness among the
university community in using Kiswahili. On the other hand, when the same administrator issues a
notice about examination invigilation regulations in English, s/he obviously maintains the unmarked
code that is used in situations such as examinations; then s/he signals that the information is
intended for the academic staff only.

The kind of code switching explained above is what has been described as code switching at a
macro level whereby two languages, each with distinct functions in specific situations, are used in
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

12

alternation. Language choice is made based on consideration of topic, interlocutors and setting (cf.
Fishman, 1968). In the following part, I explain code switching at a micro level; code switching of
this nature is unusual in the classroom interaction of interest in this study.

Code switching at a micro level entails what Gumperz (1982:61) and Bloom and Gumperz
(2000:126) have referred to as conversational code switching. This is a phenomenon characteristic
of verbal interactions among speakers of more than one language. It functions to mark aspects of
discourse such as quotations, addressee specification, interjections, reiteration, message qualification
and personalisation.

At the University of Dar es Salaam such conversational code switching occurs during classroom
interaction, specifically in lectures. Similar to what happens in the communication between the
university administration and the university's academic community, classroom interaction often
exhibits code switching between English and Kiswahili. These code-switches have specific
functions and are specific to the situation where it is directed towards achieving a certain
communicative effect. This form of code switching, its functions and effects, will be illustrated in
the analysis to be presented in chapter four.

However, unlike the macro level code switching, which is between two distinct languages that are
alternately and systematically used in different situations by designated participants, micro level
code switching occurs within a single speech event, often in the spoken contribution of a single
participant. It occurs between sentences (inter sentential), within sentences (intra sentential) and
even within words, as will be illustrated in the analysis to be presented in chapter four.

Models of code switching such as the Matrix Language Model (MLF) (Myers-Scotton, 1997) have
been developed to explain such patterns of bilingual language use. This kind of code switching is
one of the characteristic aspects of discourse that I sought to identify and analyse from the recorded
lectures (cf. chapter four). This is particularly relevant to the study as there is an ongoing debate
about teacher code switching at different levels of education in Tanzania. For example, quite
recently notices were posted reminding University of Dar es Salaam lecturers that the official
language of classroom interaction was English.

Although code switching and code-mixing is actively discouraged in official planning and policy
regarding languages of teaching and learning, it is unlikely that in a context as multilingual as the
one at the University of Dar es Salaam, there will be no use of or reference to community languages
other than English. Therefore, this study will also attend to the possibility of lecturers drawing on or
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

13

allowing the use (even if just informally) of indigenous languages such as Kiswahili in the course of
lectures. Literature on the use of more than one language in teaching and learning in multilingual
settings, particularly at tertiary level (cf. Taha, 2009; Garcia, 2009; Zabrodskaja, 2009, 2008, 2007;
Banda, 2007, 2003) is particularly pertinent to this study.

1.5.2 The language of classroom interaction

A primary focus of this study is the language of classroom interaction at the University of Dar es
Salaam. The major aim is to document how non native English lecturers use language to facilitate
teaching of students who are not native speakers of English and who probably are not proficient
enough in English to understand the advanced spoken register typically used at university level. The
language of classroom interaction has become a prominent topic of academic interest to researchers
in many parts of the world though with different foci in different contexts (cf. Mwinsheikhe, 2009;
Hutchby & Wooffitt, 2008; Rubagumya, 2008; García, 2007; Goodwin & Heritage, 1990; Edwards
& Westgate, 1994; Gumperz, 1982). This section will refer briefly to aspects of research into
classroom interaction that are relevant to the research questions of this study. Although much
reference is made to research into classroom discourse at primary and secondary school level (cf.
Mwinsheikhe, 2009; Rubagumya 2008; Qorro, 2006), a clear distinction needs to be maintained
between language practices at the different levels of schooling, specifically in primary and
secondary school classrooms as opposed to classrooms at tertiary level.

1.5.2.1 Classroom interaction as institutional talk

The language of classroom interaction at the University of Dar es Salaam forms one of the aspects
of institutional talk. Hutchby and Wooffitt (2008:137) classify the language of classroom interaction
as 'institutional talk' done through verbal communication, a central social activity performed
through social interaction. Goodwin and Heritage (1990:283) observe that language plays a crucial
role in social interaction hence justifying a classification of it as a primordial means through
which the business of the social world is transacted. They add that through language the identities
of its participants are affirmed or denied, and its cultures are transmitted, renewed and modified
(Goodwin & Heritage, 1990:283). The authors conclude that through language shared meanings,
mutual understanding and the coordination of human conduct are achieved (Goodwin & Heritage,
1990:283). The human transactions such as is done in lecture room communication between
lecturers and students, with lecturers controlling the talk, informed this study.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

14

The language of classroom interaction such as the one under study forms an essential component of
academic communication, which inherently is organised towards achieving a pedagogic goal. For
Gumperz (1982:1), communication is a purposeful action rather than mere production of well-
formed sentences. Scholars list the language of classroom interaction as one of the categories of
academic discourse (cf. Castello et al., 2008; Davies, 2008; Biber, 2006; Sinclair, 2004; Scollon,
2001; Elbow, 1991; Spack, 1988). Elbow (1991:135) defines academic discourse relatively
narrowly as the discourse that academics use when they publish for other academics. Spack
(1988:29) notes that researchers and teachers endeavour to define academic discourse in terms of
skills that facilitate successful teaching and learning in university studies. Of relevance to my study
is the attention scholars have given to the large gap between the linguistic resources students bring
to the academic community and what the community expects of them (Spack, 1988:30). The
insights gained in previous studies on academic discourse are vital to my investigation into how
lecturers of the University of Dar es Salaam make use of discourse resources available to them to
achieve the goals of teaching at a tertiary institution.

Wells (1996:74) observes that although classroom interaction is mainly conducted through spoken
discourse, the relationship between the discourse and the activity goals it is intended to achieve, is
rarely scrutinised or treated as a matter of conscious choice. For example, it is noted that teachers
dominate talk in a typical classroom interaction (Gazden, 2001; Goffman, 1981; McHoul, 1978).
This could be constructed as one-way conversation, which may not be conducive to student
learning. However, teacher dominance in talk in such a setting is geared towards the achievement of
knowledge transfer and skills development - thus for an empowering purpose (Wells, 1996:75).

Learning is a socialisation process that is mediated by language (Ochs, 1986:3). Teachers are
charged with creating the conditions for successful socialization of learners. To do so, teachers need
strategies that help them coordinate academic task structure and social participation structure
(Erickson, 1982; Michaels & O'Connor, 1993). Nevertheless, this coordination is undertaken with a
view toward a larger goal: the creation of a shared classroom culture that facilitates students'
engagement with the relevant academic content (Michaels & O'Connor, 1993:318). This study will
investigate how such social mediation is enacted in selected classrooms at multilingual Dar es
Salaam University.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

15

1.5.2.2 Classifying and analysing classroom discourse

Hutchby and Wooffitt (2008:137) classify the language of classroom interaction as 'institutional talk'
done through verbal communication, a central social activity performed through social interaction.
Institutional talk can take place face to face or via the telephone. It can also take place in a hospital,
courtroom and educational establishment such as classroom (Heritage & Drew, 1992:3). Since
language plays a crucial role in social interaction, particularly in our everyday thinking, learning
and communication with one another (Davies, 2008:92), it can be classified as a primordial means
through which the business of the social world is transacted, the identities of its participants are
affirmed or denied and its cultures are transmitted, renewed and modified. This is because through
language shared meanings, mutual understanding and the coordination of human conduct, such as
is required in lecture room communication are achieved (Goodwin & Heritage, 1990:283).

1.5.2.3 Functions of classroom discourse

The language of classroom interaction as a pedagogic discourse works to create curriculum genres
and curriculum macro-genres (Christie 2002; Smit, 2010). Christie (2002) distinguishes two types
of register under which the two creations of pedagogic discourse should be understood. These are
'first order' or 'regulatory register' and 'second order' or 'institutional register'. The former relates to
the overall goals, directives, pacing and sequencing of classroom activity while the latter relates to
the particular content to be taught and learnt. Additionally, in any classroom activity the two
registers interact with each other in patterned ways to perform five sub activities namely to (i) create
the pedagogic activity (ii) establish goals (iii) introduce and sequence the teaching and learning of
the content and (iv) evaluate the success with which the knowledge is learnt (Christie, 2002:5;
Wells, 1996:76).

1.5.2.4 Primacy of classroom discourse

As Cazden (1988:2-3) emphasizes, the primacy of classroom discourse lies in the fact that any
social institution can be considered as a communication system. Thus, the study of classroom
discourse is the study of that communication system. Since the purpose of school is achieved
through language (cf. Christie, 2002:2; Cazden, 2001:2), communication is central in educational
institutions where spoken language is the prominent medium by which teaching takes place and
students demonstrate to teachers much of what they have learnt. Classrooms being one of the most
crowded human environments, and being the setting in which one person controls all that occurs
during class sessions, classroom discourse becomes an important object of scrutiny. Moreover,
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

16

because classrooms usually include people from different linguistic backgrounds (Cazden, 1988:3),
it is likely that some sort of multilingualism represented in most classrooms can emerge (Smit,
2010:20). Therefore, spoken language becomes an important part of all the participants (Cazden,
1988:3).

1.5.2.5 Analysing classroom discourse

As Dalton-Puffer (2007:1) asserts, the curricula of content subjects such as Sociology and Political
Science for the case of the current study, constitute a reservoir of concepts, topics and meanings
which can really become an object of study. A growing body of research indicates that the language
of classroom interaction has attracted the attention of many people (Edwards & Westgate, 1994:1).
This has been both in terms of their academic or professional orientation and in terms of the models
that they have proposed to use in approaching its investigation, as well as the goals they have sought
to achieve (Edwards & Westgate, 1994:3). Practically the endeavour to analyse the language of
classroom interaction has involved researchers from fields such as ethnography, linguistics (pure,
applied and educational) and psychology, with different resultant models (Christie, 2002:1).

1.5.2.6 Purposes of analysing classroom discourse

Dalton-Puffer (2007:15) observes that the term “classroom discourse” encompasses a highly
complex real world event regardless of whether one experiences it as a live observer, watches or
listens to recordings, or studies transcripts. As Wragg (1999:vii) puts it, observing our fellow
humans in action is a lifelong activity. Classrooms as one of the arenas in which human beings act
different roles, comprise of an enormous aspects for observation. Because we have the power of
observation and deduction, in a classroom, like it is in real life, we can recognise what is familiar
and what is novel (Wragg, 1999:vii).

With the above account, it is a fact that the analysis of classroom discourse involves observation and
Wragg (1999:5) mentions six purposes for which different individuals or bodies conduct classroom
observation. For example, a school's language coordinator can observe a primary school teacher to
devise means of responding to the concern about dropping levels of literacy among boys in the
school. A head of department can observe a secondary school science teacher during a lesson as part
of science department's self-appraisal exercise. A supervising teacher or tutor can observe a student
on teaching practice. A school inspector can scrutinise a mathematics lesson during a formal
inspection of the school. A textbook writer can observe a class in order to prepare a series of
activities for learners. Lastly, as one of the targeted activities of this study, a researcher can watch a
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

17

class going on to study the teacher's questioning techniques by noting down the various questions
asked by the teacher and the responses obtained. Although all these are watching lessons activities,
their purposes and approaches are different. This means that the purpose, timing and context of an
observation should largely determine its methods. As for this study, it specifically studied the
lecturers' use of discourse strategies by noting down the various discourse strategies used, the
pattern in which they were used and their potential functionality in facilitating learning in higher
education.

1.5.2.7 The language of classroom interaction as a structured experience

Any language behaviour can be regarded as a structured experience (Christie, 2002). A casual
conversation, such as in the family, workplace and among friends is also structured, although
participants may not be aware of the structure. The central view is that a classroom activity is a
structured experience and associated classroom work is a social practice (Christie, 2002:3).

Several studies have shown how structured classroom discourse is. For example, Leinhardt et al.
(1987) using planning nets approach to study how teachers established the instructional structure in
their classrooms, observed six lessons by expert teachers with focus on the role of routines in the
evolving classroom discourse structure. They established that classroom discourse comprises two
components; 'Activity structures' and 'Routines'. Accordingly they identified three classes of
routines namely management, instructional support, and teacher-student exchange routines. Results
further indicated that teachers used simple routines to form more elaborate strings of action. By
doing this, they increased the variety and complexity of the classroom discourse. Concerning
'Activity structures', they focused on teacher-student action and found that functional activity
structure and efficient supporting routines were a benchmark of a successful teacher (Leinhardt et
al., 1987:136).

1.5.2.8 Reasons for analysing classroom discourse in Tanzania

Hyland (2006:37) notes that although academic discourse relates to wider social, cultural and
institutional issues, until recently, there has been less emphasis on the variation in spoken genres
such as lectures. This is because knowledge produced in academic institutions is largely in written
language (Hyland, 2006:38).

As noted in section 1.12 above, there are a good number of important studies about the language of
classroom interaction at different levels in Tanzania, such as for example, Mwinsheikhe (2009),
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

18

Rubagumya (2008), Brock-Utne (2005), Vuzo (2005), Brock-Utne (2007), Brock-Utne (2001a),
Brock-Utne (2001), Qorro (1999), Rubagumya et al. (1998) and Mlama and Matteru (1978).
Nevertheless, politics, particularly debates about colonial legacy and postcolonial language policies
and their effects, have largely influenced those studies. As a result, they have focused more on
problems related to English language proficiency of both teachers and students in secondary
schools. In this regard, they have unanimously reported that using the English language in
classrooms has been a hindrance to both delivery of content by teachers and comprehension and
retention of content by students.

A notable trend in those studies is the relationship between language and comprehension. The
influence of English language competence and use on comprehension and retention at secondary
education level is well documented. However, until today, the way classroom discourse occurs at
higher learning level in Tanzania in the context of English being used as an academic lingua franca,
has not been studied. Therefore, as it is argued that more than 75% of classroom talk time in higher
learning classrooms is supposedly consumed by lecturers (cf. Morell, 2004), it is important to
analyse the classroom discourse at that level so as to identify what goes on in that context (Milne,
2006:9).

1.5.3 Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis

The language of classroom interaction depicts both conversational and discourse features that
provide rich material for linguistic analysis. They possess a conversational structure with such
features as participants, openings and closings (cf. Sacks et al., 1974) and discourse functions such
as explaining and questioning (cf. Dalton-Puffer, 2007). These linguistic characteristics of
classroom language require the use of a conversational-discourse analytic framework in order to
exhaustively analyse the language as it is used during lecture sessions at the UDSM. In the
following sections, the terms ‘conversation’ and ‘discourse’ are clarified.

1.5.3.1 The term 'conversation'

As this research is interested in spoken classroom discourse, the analytic framework presented by
conversation analysis is one of the approaches used for describing and interpreting the data. The
framework developed by Atkinson and Drew (1979) and associated with the tradition of ascribing
language to particular institutions within the conversation analysis research approach, was followed.
However, different researchers have viewed the term 'conversation' differently. Cristal and Davy
(1975) view it as a vague term that can be used to describe any discourse. Cook (1989) views it as a
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

19

term that refers to unplanned communicative tasks, which suspends power asymmetry among
participants, which has a small number of participants, which has short turns, and which primarily
addresses the participants and not an outside audience. Johnstone (2002) views it as any kind of
spoken interaction ranging from unstructured casual conversation to structured conversation such as
debates. Overall, the important issue in all these views is that they refer to conversation as one of a
number of discourse types. This study will attend to conversational features that are evident in
classroom interactions.

1.5.3.2 The terms 'discourse' and 'discourse types'

It is important at this point to define 'discourse' and 'discourse types'. Cook (1989:6) defines
'discourse' in education by distinguishing two kinds of language use as potential objects for study.
The first type is the study of specific languages included in the curriculum; the second type is the
study of language as a means of imparting knowledge. Thus, he distinguishes between an interest in
learning of a language, and an interest in language as an instrument in teaching and learning. His
interest, as the interest in this study, is in the coherent use of language used to communicate the
content of a specific discipline in various educational settings. Therefore, for Cook (1989:50)
'discourse' refers to large units of language (spoken or written) that are unified and meaningful, and
of which the cohesive devices can be identified and assessed. Other definitions are provided by
Levinson 1983 who defines ‘discourse’ as a formal linguistic unit with a set of charactersing
features, and by Gee (2011) who defines ‘discourse’ in terms of the social functions of language.
This study will prefer the definition of Cook; however, Levinson’s structural features are partly
integrated into Cook’s view, and Gee’s perspective of the social function of discourse is relevant
when the relation between form and function of lectures as discourses is considered.

1.5.3.3 Distinguishing between discourse and conversation

Distinguishing between discourse and conversation is not an easy task because in modern literate
societies the two terms seem to be dependent on each other. On the one hand, Abercrombie (1965)
emphasizes that conversation is synonymous to spoken language, and Svartvik and Quirk (1980)
find that about 99% of all speech is conversation. On the other hand, Cook (1989) maintains that
there are various modes of discourse, among which conversation is specifically classified as spoken
discourse. On this consideration, this study attended to conversation analytic as well as discourse
analytic approaches to the investigation of classroom interaction such as is observed at the
University of Dar es Salaam.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

20

1.5.4 Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis

This study used both Conversation Analysis (CA) and Discourse Analysis (DA) as approaches to
assist in the investigation of language use in tertiary education classrooms, for two major reasons.
The first reason relates to the historical development of studies on conversation and spoken
discourse worldwide. Firth (1935) found the study of conversation important because it provides the
key to a better understanding of what language is and how it works. This is an important
consideration when one remembers the linguistic diversity of the higher education context in
Tanzania and how lecturers at university level use language to cater for such diversity. The second
reason relates to the central theoretical contribution of CA that talk, even informal, unplanned talk,
is a highly organised and socially ordered phenomenon. Thus, as Hutchby and Wooffitt (2008:137)
explain, in analysing oral communication as one finds in lectures, CA can reveal how the
communicative event is organised, how lecturers attempt to achieve coherence in interaction and
what the role of the event is in wider social processes. Heritage (1984:290) notes that the use of the
acquired knowledge of discourse organization of institutional talk can demonstrate how institutions
conduct institutional activities, such as teaching. Although it is not customary to use CA and DA as
analytic approaches in the same study, the nature of the data used here, namely spoken language
belonging to the discourse types of 'lecture' and 'interview', justifies reference to both, as will be
further explained and elaborated in chapter two.

1.6 RESEARCH PARADIGM, DESIGN AND METHODS

1.6.1 Research paradigm

This study is a qualitative research project, which corresponds to the definition of Berg (2009) that
defines qualitative research as attending to the meanings, concepts, definitions, characteristics,
metaphors, symbols and descriptions of things. It answers questions by examining various social
settings and individuals who inhabit these settings. For example, this paradigm allows for in-depth
research into how people make sense of the way they conduct themselves through symbols, rituals,
social structures and social roles. It was suitable for this study due to the nature of data sought and
analysed. My main interest was to demonstrate how lecturers make use of the linguistic repertoire
available to them in the teaching and learning process at a multilingual tertiary education level, as
well as how they reflect on the discourse strategies they use. Banda (2009:6) refers to linguistic
repertoire as the total range of codes available to the bilingual speaker that allow him or her to
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

21

perform different roles across ethnic, community, regional and national boundaries as well as
different modalities, styles and registers s/he adopts in performing such roles.

1.6.2 Research design

This is a case study research design, an empirical enquiry that investigates a contemporary
phenomenon in depth and within its real life context (Mouton, 2001). This approach allows for
examining of relatively complex phenomena, with units of analysis varying from individuals to
class groups (Creswell, 2007). It was suitable to this study because the study intended to explore
intensively the languages of classroom interaction, as one aspect of the tools of teaching and
learning at the University of Dar es Salaam, for understanding how diverse linguistic resources were
used by lecturers.

1.6.3 Research methodology

According to the records of the Tanzania Commission for Universities (TCU), which was launched
in 2005, Tanzania has eighteen accredited universities of which the University of Dar es Salaam is
the oldest and largest. The University is composed of four colleges, two institutes and six schools
that are spread across five campuses of the university. Thus, the population for this study comprises
the students and academic staff members of the University of Dar es Salaam. As Berg (2009:3)
recommends, a population like this was relevant because it was easily accessible to me as a
researcher; it consisted the target population, and it contained all the necessary sources of
information to answer the research questions of this study.

This study selected participants through the purposive sampling procedure. Berg (2009:3)
recommends this sampling procedure for an exploratory study of this nature because it allows a
researcher to use his or her knowledge or expertise about some group to select subjects who
represent the population relevant to the study. This sampling procedure thus suited me as a lecturer
in the College of Arts and Social Sciences (CASS).

The college is the focus of the study because it is appropriate both in setting and in population. It is
the oldest and largest both in terms of teaching staff and in terms of number of students. It hosts
eight departments namely the Department of Political Science, the Department of Sociology and
Social Anthropology, the Department of History and Anthropology, the Department of Geography,
the Department of Foreign Languages and Linguistics, the Department of Economics, and the
Department of Statistics. I sampled the first two departments for this study because at the time this
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

22

study was envisaged they were the largest in the college. I thus had a conviction that they would
most likely provide as wide a spectrum as possible of the specific communicative and discourse
strategies for observation. Four lecturers from each department who happened to be teaching first
year classes by the time of data collection were selected based on convenience. This also applied for
the courses that were on session by that time. This made up a total of eight lecturers and eight
lecture hours.

To answer the questions for this study, I needed three sets of data: (i) data on discourse strategies
that were used by the selected lecturers during classroom interaction with students; (ii) data on how
and how regularly the lecturers used such discourse strategies; and (iii) data on the lecturers' own
reflection on the use of discourse strategies bearing in mind the variety of linguistic resources of
their students during lectures. For the first and second sets of data, I attended selected lectures and
made video and audio recordings for later transcription and analysis with a view to identifying and
assessing various observed discourse strategies. For the third set of data, following the attendance of
the lectures, I interviewed the respective lecturers in order to gain introspective information from
them on their use of the observed discourse strategies during lectures. The interviews were semi-
structured in that they aimed at the interests of the project, but also allowed open discussion where
lecturers chose to highlight what they found to be of primary importance.

The audio and video-recorded data were transcribed, analysed and interpreted using techniques and
annalistic devices presented by CA (cf. Psathas, 1995; ten Have, 2001) and DA (cf. Cook, 1989).
These two approaches allowed for content analysis (cf. Busch et al., 2005) that gave insight into the
coherence of the particular subject material and topic of the lecture. These research tools for
analysing the meanings and relationships of words and concepts were used in the analysis that lead
to reliable inferences about the structure as well as explicit and implicit content that had a bearing on
the specific issues under investigation. Discourse was coded into manageable categories on macro
and micro levels. Finally, the coded information on strategies and their uses were triangulated with
interview data to gain as complete an impression as possible on the discourse strategies used in
classroom interaction in such multilingual educational setting as the University of Dar es Salaam.

1.7 THESIS OUTLINE

This introductory chapter has provided the background and rationale for the study. It has identified
and stated the problem, the research aim and objectives for this study. It has also presented an
overview of the linguistic diversity in Tanzania particularly the variety of indigenous languages in
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

23

the country, the development of Kiswahili as a national lingua franca, the establishment of English
as an official language and lingua franca in the country, and it has described the language policy and
the language-in-education policy in the country. Additionally, the chapter has highlighted the
language of classroom interaction in higher education in the country. It also presented the English
only policy in place in the higher education system and the status and use of English as an academic
lingua franca in higher education in the country. The chapter has further explained the status of
Kiswahili as a local lingua franca as well as an informal language of learning in higher education in
the country (in relation to language choice and use). It has briefly presented some general theoretical
issues pertaining to the analysis of the language of classroom interaction and recapped on the issues
pertaining to conversation analysis and discourse analysis. The reason for combining both
Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis as analytic framework for this study has been
explained. Finally, the chapter indicated the research paradigm, design and methods adopted for this
study.

Chapter two reviews the state of the literature related to the topic under study. The review of
literature presented here covers the conceptualisation of Conversation Analysis as a theoretical
framework for the study. Particularly it presents definitions of “conversation” and conversational
features. Then it presents the history of Conversation Analysis and the theoretical contributions of
the analytic framework. The chapter further focuses on Discourse Analysis as a theoretical
framework for the study. It specifically focuses on defining the terms ’discourse‘, ‘discursive
features’ and ‘discourse types’. It also presents the history of Discourse Analysis, study of discourse
strategies and touches on how Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis function as
frameworks for analysing the language of classroom interaction. It then refers to pertinent issues of
bilingualism and bilingual education, English as a lingua franca and code switching.

Chapter three presents a detailed account of how I conducted this study. I describe the research
paradigm selected for this study and explain how it is characterised, as well as giving the rationale
for the adoption of this research paradigm for the study. I present the research design adopted for
this study as well as explaining its nature and application, and the population, sample and sampling
procedures adopted. The data collection process, specifically the schedule, sets of data selected, type
of interviews conducted, reasons for selecting such an interview type and the setting for the
interviews are all explained. Also described and explained are the profiles of the research
participants, how I processed and analysed data by specifically stating the sources of data, the
transcription process, the organisation of transcripts and the coding process. I give an account of
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

24

how I interpreted the data, then I report on the ethical considerations of this study, and finally, I
report on some of the limitations that I faced while conducting this study.

Chapter four presents and discusses the findings of the research. It particularly focuses on three
propositional discourse strategies that were analysed as well as structural discourse strategies
represented by regularly used discourse markers and particular personal pronouns. It also presents
the interview data information about lecturer's classroom experiences as far as English as LoI is
concerned, additional discourse strategies that lecturers use to facilitate teaching, the reasons for
their use of the strategies, and their view about the usefulness of the strategies they use. The analysis
and discussion goes in line with the first three fundamental questions that guided this study.

Chapter five addresses the fourth question of the study by providing reflections on the potential
effectiveness of the discourse strategies that lecturers use during classroom interaction with students
at the University of Dar es Salaam. It particularly contextualises the strategies within issues of
bilingualism and bilingual education in Tanzania, English as an academic lingua franca in Tanzania,
and the language of classroom interaction at the University of Dar es Salaam in relation to the
predominant lecture mode of classroom instruction. Mainly, the chapter reviews some advantages
and disadvantages associated with the lecture mode of instruction in large classes, and then it relates
the observed classroom practices of the participating lecturers with the practices that have been
identified in literature as supportive to the lecture method.

Chapter six presents the summary of the dissertation, recommendations and a conclusion that
reflects on the way forward.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

25

Chapter Two

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.0 INTRODUCTION

Chapter one consisted of the introduction to and outline of this thesis. In this chapter, I present a
literature review covering specifically those topics relevant to the research questions and analysis of
the data of the study. The review will attend to published work on discourse strategies in classroom
interaction elsewhere, for the value, it may have in identifying the discourse strategies that the
lecturers of the University of Dar es Salaam use during classroom interaction. The aim is to
categorise them in terms of their occurrence patterns in bilingual tertiary education. Specifically,
attention goes to strategies used in lectures to facilitate the learning of multilingual students for
whom the language of learning is not their first language. Thus, the review of literature draws on
research into the kinds of discourse strategies typically used in classroom interaction in general
(Sinclair & Coulthard, 1975; Mehan, 1985; Tsui, 1995; Wells, 1996). It also considers various
studies on classroom interaction in linguistically diversified communities. Special consideration
goes to strategies speakers use for smooth communication where speakers from different first
language communities and with limited shared communicative resources are in contact (cf. Long,
2003; Aito, 2005; Bührig & ThijeTen, 2006; Brock-Utne, 2007).

In the overview of literature presented here, in section 2.1 I present CA by defining the terms
'conversation' and 'conversational features' of language use. I also present CA as a part of the
theoretical framework for this study. In section 2.2, I define the terms "discourse" and 'discursive
features' of language use as well as discourse types. I also present DA as a part of the theoretical
framework for this study. In sections 2.1 to 2.3, I describe the combination of CA and DA
frameworks in analysing the language of classroom interaction. In section 2.4, I describe classroom
interaction as an instance of discourse types. In section 2.5, I review studies on bilingualism and
bilingual education. In section 2.6, I review studies about English as an academic lingua franca. In
sections 2.7 through 2.9, I review studies on classroom oral practices with special focus on
repetition, use of questions and code switching to form a template that will direct data analysis in
chapter four, and in section 2.10, I provide a summary of the chapter.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

26

2.1 CONVERSATION ANALYSIS

Lectures as instances of spoken university registers comprise of properties of spoken language that
facilitate smooth communication. These properties, though not purely conversational because a
lecture is mainly in form of monologue, share much of underlying conversational features that
require scrutiny in a study like this. In the following sections, I describe Conversation Analysis
(CA) as part of the conceptual framework that I adopted for this study. The description commences
with the characterization of the terms 'conversation'. Thereafter, I describe DA and CA as analytic
frameworks, which make up the primary conceptual framework for this study. I conclude the
section by explaining why I combined the two approaches.

2.1.1 Definitions of the term 'conversation'

As indicated earlier, different researchers have described the term “conversation” differently. They
have associated it with vagueness and lack of planning (Cristal & Davy, 1975). Cook (1989:6)
comments that it suspends power asymmetry among participants, possesses a small number of
participants, is made up of short turns, and it is primarily intended for the participants and not for an
outside audience. Moreover, Johnston (2002:73) views conversation as any kind of spoken
interaction ranging from unstructured casual conversation to structured conversations such as
debates. All these definitions refer to conversation as one of a number of discourse types (spoken
discourse) although the researchers view distinguishing between the terms 'conversation' and
'discourse' as a complex endeavour.

2.1.2 Definitions of 'conversational features'

As alluded to in section 2.1.1 above, conversation is characterised by informality, lack of prior


planning, few participants and spontaneity. It consists of features of spoken language such as
hesitations, gap fillers, interjections, and interruptions (cf. Ameka, 1992), self and other repair (cf.
Watterson, 2008). Other aspects of conversation that have been singled out for special attention are
code switching and code mixing (cf. Gulzar, 2010), questioning (cf. Roostini, 2011), self, and other
repetition (cf. Berry & Kim, 2008; Quick, 2007). Conversation is also is characterised by the use of
features of spoken language such as the use of discourse markers (cf. Zhang, 2012). Many studies in
different parts of the globe have documented how discourse markers facilitate smooth face-to-face
communication by helping in discourse organisation, content flow, and signalling of speech acts
(Zhang, 2012:45). Further exposition of discourse markers will appear under section 2.4.6.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

27

According to Sacks et al. (1974:700ff), conversation is characterised by speaker change, limitations


to the number of speakers and speaker time, presence of interruptions, and a system of turn taking.
Other features of conversation are the presence of a pre-specified topic, distribution of turns and
length of conversation, varying number of participants, turn allocation techniques (such as self-
selection or other-selection), and repair mechanisms for dealing with errors and violation of
conventions. While a lecture does not necessarily exhibit all the identified properties of
conversation, it has predictable patterns such as openings and closings; its participants, venue, time,
topic and the length of the spoken interaction are specified in advance.

In the light of the aforementioned properties of conversation, by nature lectures are not pure
instances of conversation; rather they assume some features of conversational behaviour. Like all
kinds of classroom interaction, lectures take place face to face, they involve two kinds of
participants (a speaker and hearers), they have an established turn-taking system, and they are
accompanied by paralinguistic features such as body language and facial expressions of the
participants. They also have regular features of spoken language such as hesitations, gap fillers,
questioning, code switching and mixing, substitution, use of personal pronouns, ellipsis, as well as
repetition and repair, (cf. Quick, 2007; Milne, 2006; Fortanet, 2004). Moreover, they involve
conversational strategies such as ways of beginning and ending a lecture, clarifying a point,
rephrasing, interrupting, eliciting information, making polite requests and excuses, soliciting
attention and allocating turns.

2.1.3 Conversation Analysis as theoretical framework

Conversation Analysis plays a central role in the endeavour to analyse face-to-face interaction.
Goodwin and Heritage (1990:284) regard face-to-face interaction, as it occurs in a lecture room, as a
strategic site for the analysis of human action. In the following sections, I put across the history of
Conversation Analysis and its theoretical contribution to the analysis of language in use.

2.1.3.1 History of Conversation Analysis

The history of CA as an academic discipline and its creation dates back to the mid 1960s. It is
associated with Harvey Sacks, then a professor of social psychology at the University of California
and later followed by colleagues such as Emanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson (Cadzen, 1988:39).
CA adopts ethnomethodology, followers of which believe that the proper object of the study of
language in use is the set of techniques or methods that actual participants use in constructing and
interpreting actual talk. They emphasise the use of data-driven theories, and analytic methods
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

28

characterised by patience in waiting for the data to yield the real categories that the participants
themselves orient to in talk. In order to attain such data, ethnomethodologists focus on aspects of
talk such as turn-taking patterns, repair mechanisms, agreements, disagreements, openings, closings,
and compliments (Cadzen, 1988:39). Although recognition of these features did not originate in
research of classroom discourse, these aspects of conversation have become influential in classroom
language studies (cf. Goffman, 1981; Sacks, 1992).

Although CA takes an interest in formal linguistic features of spoken discourse, ethnographers and
ethnomethodologists who subscribe to this theory have criticised some kinds of linguistic research.
They have essentially accused it for alienating the researcher from non-linguistic elements of
classroom behaviour that they believe are central elements of the communicative events. Christie
(2002:7) draws attention to the theoretical and practical importance of deciding what texts should be
selected for analysis and how they should be selected. Classroom communication, identified as a
highly conventionalised form of discourse, has often been selected and attended to from a
conversation analytic perspective.

2.1.3.2 Theoretical contribution of Conversation Analysis

The central theoretical contribution of CA is the credence that talk is a highly organised and socially
ordered phenomenon (Hutchby & Wooffitt, 2008:137). Thus in analysing oral communication as
one finds in lectures, CA can reveal how the communicative events are organised, how lecturers
conduct the lectures and what the roles of the events are in wider social processes.

Heritage (1997:162) categorizes two kinds of conversation analytic research, which overlap in
various ways but are each unique in focus. The first examines interaction as a separate institution
while the second examines the management of social institutions in interaction. Ten Have (2001)
expands this categorisation and deduces two types of CA namely 'Pure Conversation Analysis'
(PCA) and 'Applied Conversation Analysis' (ACA). The first type of CA studies structural aspects
of spoken discourse such as turn taking patterns, interruptions, adjacency pairs and various kinds of
repair (such as the study on the structure of classroom interaction by Mehan, 1985). The latter,
ACA, studies the effect of those patterns on the organisation of institutions through stabilised forms
of social practices such as classroom teaching, television news, medical consultation and so forth
(Fairclough, 2001).3 In emphasising the usefulness of ACA, Psathas (1990:21) observes that the

3
Although Fairclough mainly works within the Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) framework, in this context his ideas
relate to ACA. However, I am not going to analyse the data for this study with reference to CDA because my aim is to
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

29

interactional phenomena discovered across and within various settings enable one to do three things.
First, it allows analysts to state the interactional competencies required for participation in the
chosen settings such as the multilingual higher education setting in Tanzania. Second, it allows
analysts to articulate the prior interactional performative skills required before entering the systems
such as the higher education academic system, and third, it allows analysts to develop training
methods for those deficient in the requisite skills. In other words, ACA seeks to establish how
various aspects of discourse facilitate the attainment of interactional goals such as the imparting of
knowledge through teaching. Therefore, as Heap (1990:8) maintains, ACA allows for questions
relating to what motivates participants in their practical contexts to do things their way, even when
contrary to how the things are planned, evaluated and accounted for elsewhere in theory or at a
higher hierarchical level in an organisation. As ten Have (2001:8) advises, ACA requires some
distance from practical interests because an important part of its discoveries may reveal that things
are different from what established ideas suggest. This is a very significant methodological idea as
far as this study is concerned because some practices in classroom interaction at the University of
Dar es Salaam that seem to be run according to the standard policy, might, from an analytic
distance, turn out to be contrary to what is stipulated in policy.

For the purpose of certainty of argumentation, ten Have (2001:8) proposes the use of audio or video
recordings in research on institutional discourse, as this gives a special kind of insight into actual
instances of interaction. The data, he adds, can provide both desirable and undesirable results as far
as practical interests are concerned. Nevertheless, such results can help better understand and inform
a particular institution on actual practices, and then give directives for possible change or resistance
(Fairclough, 2001:30). This study is a special case in the larger area of the study of language as a
tool for conveying socio-cultural knowledge and a medium for socialization. It is aligned to the
perspective of O'Connor and Michaels (1993:319) in that it intends to give insight into ways of
thinking and acting, with the aim to further an understanding of the complicated processes of
language use in teaching and learning in HE institutions, such as the University of Dar es Salaam.

2.2 DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

As Johnstone (2008:1) observes, different academic sections and disciplines use the term discourse
analysis for what people do, how they do it or both, and analysts are commended for approaching
the analysis of language by posing many questions and proposing many different sorts of answers.

explore the language of classroom interaction at the University of Dar es Salaam with the primary aim of documenting
(and not engaging in aspects of language and power).
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

30

Johnstone (2008:2) further clarifies that discourse analyisis focuses on actual instances of
communicative action in the medium of language use and language allows people to perform three
important communications namely saying, doing and being (Gee, 2011: 2). Thus, in actual
situations and with specific purposes, people use different styles or varieties of language and in so
doing they build identities and activities not just through language but also by using language with
other non linguistic elements (Ibid. 28).

Analysing the language of classroom interaction such as the one under study requires additional
tools to those provided by CA, thus DA tools are equally necessary. Wetherell et al. (2001:i)
generally regard Discourse Analysis as a set of methods and theories for analysing language in use
in social contexts. Potter and Wetherell (1987:21) explain that DA uses ethno-methodological skills
to examine actions, events, situations, of which a particular discourse forms part. Johnstone (2008:3)
distinguishes discourse analysis from language analysis because it is not about language as an
abstract system but rather about what happens when people draw on their knowledge about
language and their memories of things they have said, written, heard or seen before to do things in
the world such as exchanging of information and expressing of feelings. The following sections
define discourse, discursive features, discourse types, and then present DA as part of the theoretical
framework for this study.

2.2.1 Definitions of Discourse

The language of classroom interaction, such as the kind of interaction under study here, forms one
type of discourse. According to Dooley and Levinsohn (2001:3-15), discourses differ according to
the means of production (the number of speakers), the type of content (the text genre), the manner of
production (style and register) and the medium of production (oral versus written). Keller
(2005:228) regards 'discourse' as a theoretical device for ordering and analysing data, a
fundamentally necessary hypothetical assumption for starting research of this kind. It is about
disparate elements or utterances, occurring at different instances in time and in social as well as
geographical space (Keller, 2005:228).

The concept 'discourse' is a catchphrase that has been defined differently in different contexts. For
example, Blomaert (2005:2) refers to the concept in semiotic terms as any form of action with a
meaningful symbolic behaviour such is found in literature and arts. Other scholars refer to
'discourse' as language in sequence beyond a sentence (Cameron, 2001; Tannen, 1984), or as
language in use for communication (Brown & Yule, 1983; Cook, 1989). In other cases, they refer to
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

31

'discourse' as a language about language used as social practice (Foucault, 1971; Gee, 1996), such as
discourses on poverty, war, human rights, education in Africa or Languages of Instruction. Others
refer to it as an extended and organised body of communicative units among members of a
particular discourse community with similar ideas (Young, 2008; Hyland, 2006; Borg, 2003). In an
explicit manner, Cook (1989:6) defines the concept with reference to the binary nature of language.
In this regard, Cook (1989:50) distinguishes two kinds of language as potential objects for study,
namely, spoken and written forms of language. Cook (1989:6) further defines discourse in terms of
language units larger than sentences that are coherent, thus unified and meaningful. In this study, the
first type of language as distinguished by Cook (1989), namely spoken discourse, is the target of
investigation. It has to be noted, however, that the distinction between spoken and written language
can at times be blurred (as when a lecturer reads to his or her class from a published text or from
written notes).

Abercrombie (1965) considers spoken discourse as less planned. He distinguishes between ordinary
and specialised discourse types. Warren (2006:3) follows this, identifying a list of specialised
discourse types that includes bureaucratic encounters (cf. Collins, 1987), interviews (cf. Cheepen &
Monaghan, 1990), business transactions (cf. Lampi, 1986), telephone conversation (cf. Psathas,
1986; Schegloff, 1986) courtroom discourse (cf. Atkinson & Drew, 1979; Drew, 1985), and
classroom talk (cf. Mehan, 1985; Coulthard, 1975; Tsui 1995).

However, as explained in sections 1.5.3 and 1.5.4, it is complicated to distinguish between


‘discourse’ and ‘conversation’ because, as the literature shows, the two terms are dependent on each
other. For example, Abercrombie (1965) views conversation as synonymous to spoken language
while Svartvik and Quirk (1980) estimate that about 99% of all speech is conversation. Cook
(1989:50) remarks that there are various modes of discourse, among which conversation is
specifically classified as spoken discourse. On this consideration, this study attended to conversation
and discourse analytic approaches for the investigation of classroom interaction such as the kind that
occurs in large lectures at the University of Dar es Salaam.

2.2.2 Definitions of discursive features

According to Brown and Yule (1983:1), analysing discourse is analysing language in use,
describing both the linguistic forms and the functions they serve. Two major functions of language
have been identifed. The first is the expression of content and the second is the expression of social
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

32

relations and personal attitudes. Brown and Yule (1983:1) and Halliday (1978:36-58) refer to the
former function as transactional and the latter as interactional.

Halliday (1985) further characterises language use at four levels. The first is that language functions
by drawing on semantics, grammar and vocabulary and using the resources in different ways to
make different meanings. The second is that language is context bound, therefore he understands it
to be dependent on the context. The third is that language is used as a social semiotic process
thereby making meanings through choice. The forth is that language is textually bound, thereby
working at the level beyond the sentence and thus providing a holistic understanding of structure,
organisation and development of connected oral discourse and written texts. Terminologically,
Halliday has identified the latter three functions as ideational, interpersonal and textual.

Halliday (1978:36-58) refers to these three major functions of language as the meta-functions of
langauge (See also Bloor 2004:10-11). The first function, the ideational, articulates how language
helps speakers in organising, understanding and expressing their external world, their own internal
world and consciousness. The ideational function is subdivided into an experiential and a logical
function whereby the former expresses content or ideas while the latter expresses the relationship
between the ideas (Halliday, 1978:45). The corresponding meta-function is that language is about
the natural world and it treats clauses as just representations. The second function is the
interpersonal function by which speakers become able to participate in communication, take up
roles, express and understand feelings, attitudes and judgements. Its corresponding meta-function is
that language is about the social world, especially the relationships between speakers and hearers
and it treats clauses as exchanges (Halliday, 1978:46). The last function is the textual function by
which language functions to relate what is said to the real world and using language to organise the
text itself. The corresponding meta-function is that language is about the verbal world; especially
the flow of information in a text and it treats clauses as messages (Halliday, 1978:46).

2.2.3 Discourse Types

Discourses possess features with two main characteristics, stability and instability. Stable features
resist change over a long period across long discourse stretches, while unstable ones do not (Leech,
1983:12). As for the case of text, Dooley and Levinsohn (2001:7) contend that each text type has a
social or cultural purpose of which achievement depends on a number of linguistic or textual
properties. These properties combine to form genres, referred to as the recognisable combinations of
textual properties working together to achieve a particular cultural goal.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

33

Cook (1989) and Sherzer (1987) define discourse in terms of discourse types or genres, and
accordingly divide it into two major categories: spoken and written discourse. Cook (1989:50)
further subdivides it into the four language skills of speaking and listening, writing and reading.
Even so, defining the concept 'discourse' is difficult because it has been identified in different ways
depending on such factors as academic discipline and theoretical preferences of the person defining
it. Moreover, it is said to have no self-contained meaning as it takes on meaning in its own context,
in relation to outside forces and factors such as context, previous texts and culture (Cameron, 2001;
Allen, 2000; Sherzer, 1987).

Sherzer (1987:296), for example, defines discourse as a level or component of language use related
to but distinct from grammar; it can be oral or written, and it can be approached in textual or socio-
cultural and social-interactional terms. In addition, it can be brief like a greeting, smaller than a
single sentence or lengthy like a novel or narration of personal experience. It can also be larger than
a sentence and it can be constructed out of sentences or sentence-like utterances. Therefore,
discourse includes and relates to both textual patterning (including such properties as coherence and
disjunction) and a situating of language in natural contexts of use. Context here is understood in two
senses: firstly, as the social and cultural backdrop and the ground rules and assumptions of language
usage, and secondly, as the immediate, ongoing, and emerging actualities of speech events (Sherzer,
1987:296). As Sherzer further remarks, the textual structure of a brief greeting is slim and thus-
different from that of a three-hour myth narration – or in the case of this study, a one hour lecture).
Like a three-hour myth narration, a lecture is quite intricate and complicated, and involves quite a
number of socio-cultural and interactional features that must be attended to analytically (Sherzer,
1987:296).

In this study, discourse refers to the language used for communication in academic settings such as
universities during classroom interaction. Discourse types involved are the lectures with their
inherent requirement of speaking skills. The classroom-spoken discourse such as the one analysed
in this study is highly structured and organised (cf. Smit, 2010; Cazden, 1988, 2001), thus providing
an extensive fabric of data for linguistic analysis.

Atkinson and Drew (1979) are associated with the tradition of ascribing language to particular
institutions within the CA research approach. As Cadzen (1988:40) notes, CA originally was
concerned solely with conversational interaction (such as talk between friends) but later it developed
an interest in non-conversational styles of talk such as court room interaction, interviews, medical
consultations, political speeches, radio phone-in shows, speech and language therapy sessions and
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

34

stand-up comedy (Cadzen, 1988:40). Consequently, this broadening of focus necessitates the use of
the term 'talk-in-interaction' instead of the term 'conversation', which is more restrictive (Cadzen,
1988:40).

2.2.4 Discourse Analysis as theoretical framework

2.2.4.1 History

Keller (2004:2005) reports six notions of discourse analysis inherent in the humanities. The first is
the traditional political science approach, which focuses on the relationship between arguments or
ideas and interests. This approach gives credit if the better discourse wins. The second is Discourse
Analysis, which provides the master frame and combines pragmatic and conversation analysis to
analyse micro-elements of language in use. Similar to this is Corpus Linguistics, which works with
exceptionally large corpora of text data around selected themes such as political issues, in order to
look for statistical correlations. The fourth is Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), which although
based in linguistics, has a slightly different discourse orientation, connecting discourse to ideological
language in use. The fifth is the combination of discourse theories such as those of Michel Foucault
designed to analyse the social-macro levels of power or knowledge relationship or the articulation of
collective identities. The last is cultural discourse research, a research field focusing on 'symbolic
interaction'. It subsumes three traditions namely the analysis of the construction of social problems
in public discourse, the investigation of language use and symbolic power (such as Bourdieu) and
the analysis of circuits of representation or culture in cultural studies (Keller, 2005:225). For Keller
the second and third approaches are interested in micro and macro processes of language use. The
fourth approach is interested in the interface between language and ideology while the fifth and
sixth approaches are interested in questions of knowledge production, circulation and transformation
with greater importance given to social actors.

Therefore, the interest of approaches two and three are relevant to the current study as they help
combine pragmatic and conversation analysis to analyse text data from lectures and interviews so as
to identify and analyse discourse strategies that lecturers at the University of Dar es Salaam use
during classroom interaction with students.

2.2.4.2 Theoretical Contribution of Discourse Analysis in the study of language use

Wetherell et al. (2001) regard DA as a set of methods and theories for investigating language in use
and language in social contexts. It focuses on features of text and talk (Antaki et al., 2003; Edwards,
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

35

1997). Its major foundation is in ethnomethodology (Garfinkel, 1967) which regards talk as not
merely about actions, events and situations, but as also a potent and constitutive part of those
actions, events and situations (Potter & Wetherell, 1987).

Predominant approaches to DA include first, Speech Act theory, with its fundamental interest in
what force utterances have and how it affects addressees (Austin & Searle, 1960s). The second is
ethnography of communication with its interest in the cultural values and social roles, that operate in
particular communities (Hymes, 1960s, 1970s). The third is, Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)
with its focus on the relationship between power and discourse (van Dijk, 2001; Fairclough, 2001),
and fourth, CA with its interest in the structure of discourse in social interaction (Grice, 1975).

Generally, the methods used in discourse analysis, as it is for this study, are those that produce
discourse data (Cameron, 2001:8). They involve listening to talk, transcribing it and reflecting on its
meaning and significance (Cameron, 2001:7).

2.2.4.3 Purpose of Discourse Analysis

Cameron (2001:7) clarifies that discourse analysts analyse spoken discourse with the aim of making
explicit what people normally take for granted. They also intend to show what talking accomplishes
in the life of people and in society at large (Cameron, 2001:7). Cameron (2001:7) describes two
purposes of discourse analysis. The first is analysing discourse as an end in itself, and the second is
analysing discourse as a means to some other end. As for the former purpose, Cameron (2001:7)
comments that discourse analysts study talk because they want to know about talk. In this context,
they are interested in questions concerning aspects such as how turn taking works in conversation
and whether the form of a question affects the form of the answer (Cameron, 2001:7). For the
second purpose, Cameron (2001:8) finds that discourse analysts are interested in the idea that “life is
in many ways a series of conversations”, so people's talk can provide evidence of other aspects of
their lives (Cameron, 2001:8). The second purpose is the kind that motivated this study because I
sought to discover the interactional practices of lecturers to establish how they utilise their linguistic
repertoire to accomplish the academic activity of lecturing.

Researchers have noted that the concerns of DA in general and those of classroom discourse in
particular, have changed over the years (Christie, 2002; Edwards & Westgate, 1987). This has been
due to changed perceptions about what should be the purposes of such analyses and the invention of
new methods of DA that have helped researchers to adequately elucidate language in the social
construction of experience (Christie, 2002:2).
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

36

2.2.4.4 Value of Discourse Analysis

The importance of studying how discourse facilitates an understanding of social activities such as
teaching cannot be underestimated. As Sherzer (1987:295) remarks, discourse creates, recreates,
focuses, modifies and transmits both culture and language, and their intersection. Sherzer (1987)
finds that some of the activities by which discourse does this include poetry magic, verbal duelling,
and political rhetoric. Here the resources provided by grammar, as well as cultural meanings and
symbols, are activated to their fullest potential and the essence of language-culture relationships
becomes salient (Sherzer, 1987:295). Gee (1991:1) insists that the importance of DA resides in its
two major functions. These are the scaffolding of the performance of social activities (such as
teaching) and the scaffolding of human affiliations within cultures and social groups and institutions
(such as universities). Gee (1991:1) further argues that the major concern of DA is to treat discourse
as an instrument of social construction of experience. Such experience in lectures would be
constructed by lecturers' choice and use of discourse strategies.

2.2.5 Studying discourse strategies

Literature on classroom interaction comprises a complex description of what can be identified as a


discourse strategy due to the mix up of aspects to be included. There are many aspects of discourse
that are interchangeably referred to as discourse strategies, communication strategies or teaching
strategies. These are narrating, humour, scaffolding, explaining, paraphrasing, repetition, and
questioning. Others are approximation, word coinage, circumlocution, borrowing, literal translation,
language switch, appeal for assistance, mime, and topic avoidance (cf. Tarone 1978; Cegala, 1988;
Van de Stuyf, 2002; Lawson, 2002; Butcher, 2006; Dalton-Puffer, 2009). In the following sections,
I define discourse strategies in accordance with the current study and I categorise two levels of
analysis of discourse strategies adopted for this study.

2.2.5.1 Defining discourse strategies

A discourse strategy can generally be defined as a strategy for communication between or among
people (Walker, 1994). As it is for many other concepts, in literature the concept discourse strategy
has received various definitions. Some literatures define the concept as discourse strategies
(O'Connor & Michaels, 1993), communicative strategies (Tarone, 1978; Cegalla & Villaume,
1988). Others have referred to it as teaching strategies (Van de Stuyf, 2002; Butcher 2006),
conversational devices (Taylor, 2002), speaker strategies (House, 2009) and conversational
strategies (Gumperz, 1982). In this study, the analysis follows the concept discourse strategy as it
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

37

encapsulates all the other concepts. Nevertheless, for this study the term 'discourse strategies' was
meant to include propositional discourse strategies particularly 'questioning', repetition' and 'code
switching' and structural discourse strategies namely discourse markers 'Now' and 'So', and
pronouns 'we', 'you' and 'I'.

Generally, the study of discourse strategies has been at two levels, micro and macro levels. In the
following sections, I describe studies on discourse strategies at the macro (propositional discourse
strategies) and micro (structural discourse strategies) levels. In this study, the concept 'propositional
discourse strategy' refers to any communicative strategy that relates to any discourse function such
as explaining, directing, exemplifying and emphasising. A structural discourse strategy refers to any
communicative strategy that functions, among others, to mark cohesion, topic connectivity and
continuity (such as discourse markers) and stance (such as personal pronouns) in a text.

2.2.5.2 Macro level

At a macro level, researchers refer to propositional strategies such as re-voicing, which helps the
teacher coordinate academic task structure and participation structure (O'Connor & Michaels,
1993). Others are teacher higher-level questioning, teacher elaboration of students' ideas, teacher
probing questions, student participation, and student-to-student participation (Rossignol, 1997).
Moreover, Wells (1996) presents other strategies such as pausing during a lecture, which allow
students to consolidate their notes. Others are the inserting of brief demonstrations, inserting of short
ungraded writing exercises followed by class discussions, and adopting alternative formats to lecture
method (the feedback lecture and the guided lecture). Others are the use of the discussion method
for promoting long-term retention of information, motivating students toward further learning and
allowing students to use information in new settings. The last are the use of visual based instruction,
which helps make focal point for other interactive techniques, in-class writing for involvement of
students in doing things and thinking about them, problem solving strategies such as case study and
guided study design, and lastly, cooperative learning such as debates, drama, role-playing,
simulation and peer teaching.

Features of spoken discourse strategies as are characteristic of classroom interaction include


repetition, the use of questions and code switching. Literature on these features indicates the
pervasiveness of their use cross-culturally. There various types of repetition such self-repetition (cf.
Allwood et al., 1990; Leftein & Snell, 2011), other repetition (cf. Knutson, 2010), and resumptive
repetition (cf. Quick, 2007).
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

38

2.2.5.3 Micro level

At a micro level are the structural discourse strategies. These as well, have been referred to by a
varying range of terms such as Discourse Markers, which have further been approached from
different perspectives. For example, they have been referred to as Cohesive Markers (Halliday &
Hassan, 1976), Discourse Markers (Fraser, 2004; Shiffrin, 1987; Traugott, 1995), Gambits (Keller,
1981; DuFon, 1995) or as Pragmatic Markers (Fraser, 1990, 1998; Andersen, 2000; Cuenca 2008).
Fraser (1990) further categorises DMs at five levels to include coordinate conjunctions such as
'and’, ‘but', subordinate conjunctions such as 'after', 'although', adverbials such as 'anyway',
'furthermore', prepositional phrases such as 'above all', and prepositions such as 'despite', 'in spite of'.

Discourse markers help as discourse organizers or in bridging switches from one section to another.
They include words such as 'well' (Cuenca, 2008) and 'like' (Andersen, 2000). Others include
gambits such as openers, closers, particles, and pause fillers (Keller, 1981). Others are aspects of
conversational organisation such as turn taking patterns, interruptions, adjacency pairs and repairs
(Keller, 1981). As DuFon (1995:27) observes, sometimes DMs include words and phrases or even
sentences that play a crucial role in the interpretation of discourse by signalling coherent relations
between discourse units. For example, DuFon (1995:27) explains that they can be used to do a
number of activities. They semantically guide the hearer through discourse by means of phrases like
'the main point is', facilitate turn taking by using expressions like 're interchangeably referred to as
discourse strategies, communication strategies or teaching strategies?', or mark a discourse
boundary by use of expressions like 'that is all I have to say' (DuFon, 1995:27). Moreover, they have
core meaning that is procedural, not conceptual (Fraser, 1999; Blakemore, 2002; Anderson, 2003;
Wang et al., 2010). Therefore, the prime function of DMs is to bracket discourse by marking
relations between sequentially dependent units of discourse (Traugott, 1995:5).

2.2.5.4 Specific studies on discourse strategies

There are several studies on various discourse strategies at both macro and micro levels. At a micro
level there are studies on issues such as the functions of 'you know' in women's and men's speech
(Holmes, 1986), on the use of 'like' (Andersen, 2000), on the functions of 'Okay' in Classroom
Discourse (Nowotny, 2004). Others are on the use of 'well' (Schiffrin, 2012; Cuenca, 2008; Jucker,
1993), on the use of 'face work' discourse strategies (Dippold, 2011), on the use of personal
pronouns (Milne, 2006; Fortanet, 2004), on the use of 'So, ok, well, now' in university spoken,
register (Biber, 2006) and the use of 'Now' in courtroom discourse (cf. Hale, 1999)
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

39

At a macro level there are studies such the one on 'explaining' (Dalton-Puffer, 2009), 'repetition'
(Quick, 2007), 'complementing' (Golato, 2003), 'recasting' (Lyster, 2004, 1998), 'code switching'
(Setati, 1998; Turner, 2009), questioning' (Athanasiadou, 1990); and the use of personal pronouns
(Milne, 2006). As Cegala and Villaume (1988:2) note, the choice and use of particular discourse
strategies signify communicative competence, which entails the ability of speakers to mesh their
utterances to form coherent conversation (Cegala & Villaume, 1988:2). Generally, Milne (2006:4)
observes that in a classroom interaction the pronoun "we" is considered to act as a solidarity strategy
as well as a macro organisation principle guiding both lecturers and students through speech events.
For the case of Tanzania, Mwinsheikhe (2009:227-8) identifies four coping strategies that teachers
in Tanzanian secondary schools adopt to overcome language-related learning barriers. These are
code switching, safe talk, negative reinforcement and teaching of English language skills. Cullen
(2002) also finds that teachers in secondary school use repetition of students' utterances to support
them.

2.3 CONVERSATION ANALYSIS AND DISCOURSE ANALYSIS IN


INVESTIGATING ACADEMIC DISCOURSE

Classroom discourse can be analysed using CA and DA research approaches (cf. Cadzen, 1988).
While both approaches have discourse as their raw materials, they differ methodologically. On the
one hand, DA adopts a deductive methodology. In this regard, it involves reasoning from the
general to the specific by focusing on rules for producing well-formed units of language larger than
the sentence. CA on the other hand, adopts the inductive methodology, which involves reasoning
from the particular to the general by focusing on the sequential organisation of talk-in-interaction
(Cadzen, 1988:39). However, the two methods are similar in that both apply to language although
DA focuses on both spoken and written language while CA focuses only on the spoken language
(Gadzen, 1988:39).

This study combined both CA and DA analytic approaches due to two major reasons. The first
relates to the historical development of studies on conversation and spoken discourse worldwide.
Firth (1935) found that the study of conversation is important as it provides the key to a better
understanding of what language is and how it works. This is an important consideration when one
remembers the linguistic diversity of the higher education context in Tanzania. The second reason
for this study to combine both CA and DA approaches is the fact that discourse analysts and
conversation analysts have similar and connected interests (Montgomery, 1986). DA focuses on
how utterances fit together as how discourse unfolds while CA concentrates on the conversation
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

40

structure by focusing on features such as turn-taking systems and adjacency pairs (Warren, 2006).
Cook (1989:6) concludes that DA is about what gives coherence to language in use. It particularly
examines how stretches of language considered in their full textual, social and psychological
context, become meaningful and unified for their users. CA on the other hand, studies the
organisational structure of language. In this study, CA thus helped as a tool to map all organisational
features of the recordings then DA helped to determine how the structures observed in the lectures
assisted in highlighting the occurrence of discourse strategies in the lectures.

The two analytic approaches are relevant to the present study because they facilitated an
understanding of how lecturers use different structural discourse patterns to facilitate
communication in a multilingual academic setting. The materials used reflect the aim of the two
approaches. For instance, ten Have (2001:5) suggests the use of audio or video recordings in
research on institutional discourse. This is because this kind of materials gives a special kind of
insight into actual instances of interaction. Consequently, the data can provide both desirable and
undesirable results as far as practical interests are concerned. Practical interests in the context of this
study are of two main types. The first is the policy statement of the university that prohibits lecturers
from code switching and code mixing. The second is the pedagogical practice by which the lecture
method of teaching is typically monologue.

Results of this study indicate that code switching and code mixing are characteristic of university
lecturers' language use. The results also show that lecturers do not only flow monologically
throughout the lectures rather they mix with dialogue through strategies such as questioning. They
also significantly use teachings aids such as the white and or chalk board. Corroborated with the
argument by Fairclough (2001:30), such results can help better understand and inform the university
of Dar es Salaam for change or resistance. Therefore, this study shows how lecturers of the
University of Dar es Salaam use whatever means available to ensure that lectures flow smoothly. As
O'Connor and Michaels (1993:319) observe, a study like this functions as a special case in the larger
study of language as a tool for conveying socio-cultural knowledge. It also functions as a medium
for socialization into ways of thinking and acting; and its aim is to further an understanding of the
complicated processes of language use in teaching and learning in higher education.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

41

2.4 CLASSROOM INTERACTION AS DISCOURSE TYPE

2.4.1 The University lecture as discourse type

Lectures form one aspect of discourse genres (Leftein & Snell, 2011:41), which are relatively stable
ways of using language resulting from recurring situations in different areas of social activity.
Discourse genres serve both as resource for fashioning utterances and constraints upon the way
those utterances are understood and judged by others (Leftein & Snell, 2011:41). They encompass,
a range of social and semiotic dimensions, among others being thematic content, compositional
structure, styles, lexical items, interactional roles and norms, interpersonal relations and evaluative
frames (Leftein & Snell, 2011:41).

The analysis of multilingual institutional discourse such as in higher education institutions focuses
on a variety of activities by different members of the community in different settings, ways and
purposes. The roles of lecturers in completing their duties, as it is the case for any other teacher, are
diverse. Wragg (1999:5) describes five roles that teachers play, which can be in one way or another,
similar to the roles lecturers play. The first one is the traditional role as transmitters of knowledge.
The second is the role of teachers as counsellors (advising learners about carriers, aspirations and
problems). The third is the role of teachers as social workers (dealing with family issues). The fourth
is the role of teachers as assessors (marking learners' work, giving tests, writing reports); and the last
is the role of teachers as managers (looking after resources, organising groups, setting goals (Wragg,
1999:5). The first role is relevant to this study because it is the role that can easily be influenced by
elements such as the shape and size of the class and building, and more specifically, the linguistic
repertoire of participants. This influence can affect the style of teaching (lecture method as opposed
to discussion method) in larger classes such as the targeted ones in this study. It can also influence
materials used (lecture notes as opposed to handouts, white or chalk board as opposed to overhead
projector or power point). Specifically, the role requires a careful selection and use of discourse
strategies to facilitate teaching predominantly using the lecture method as it is at the University of
Dar es Salaam.

2.4.2 The language of classroom interaction as an Academic Discourse

The language of classroom interaction forms one of the categories of academic discourse (cf.;
Castello et al., 2008; Davies, 2008; Biber, 2006; Sinclair, 2004; Scollon, 2001; Elbow, 1991).
Elbow (1991:135) defines academic discourse specifically as the discourse that academics use when
they publish for other academics. Nevertheless, this limited definition does not consider the wider
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

42

range of academic genres that are used and investigated. Spack (1988:29) notes that researchers and
teachers endeavour to define academic discourse skills in recognition of a specific genre that has
become conventionalised, and having defined the set of associated skills these are used to facilitate
successful teaching and learning in university studies. Schleppegrell (2009:1) defines academic
discourse as a set of linguistic 'registers' that construe multiple and complex meanings at all levels
and in all subjects of schooling. Duff (2007:1) refers to this process of becoming adept at using the
genre as an academic discourse socialisation process. Duff comments that given the contemporary
contexts of higher education, the process has become more dynamic, situated and cultural, as well as
multimodal and multilingual (Duff, 2007:1).

2.4.3 Organisation of Discourse and of Academic Discourse

It is very difficult to find all the properties of conversation listed by Sacks et al. (1974:700-701) in a
lecture but at least in a lecture, the topic and length of conversation are specified in advance. This
implies that lectures are formal in both topic and setting and involve specific participants. Unlike
ordinary conversations, lectures are planned, have beginning middle and end. Thus, a lecture as a
genre defined by Hyland (2006:46) as a form for grouping texts together and as a tool for
interpreting academic texts in their social contexts, has a significantly different turn-taking system
from those in lower levels of education. One of the organisational properties of a lecture, as it is to
other genres, is the turn-taking system. Sacks et al. (1974:696) suggest three aspects to focus on
when analysing the turn taking system of any discourse. The first is the shape of the activity at hand
(such as a lecture), and how it affects the distribution of turns. The second is the adaptability of the
turn-taking system to the activity at hand, and the third is the adaptability of the activity at hand to
the turn-taking system. Heritage and Drew (1992:25) remark that the turn taking system in an
institutional interaction differs from that in ordinary conversation. It is formal and it happens within
the constraints of a specialised turn-taking system. Moreover, in institutional interaction five
elements play a large role. There is a lexical choice between lay and technical vocabulary through
which speakers evoke and orient to institutional context of their talk. The turn design involves the
selection of activity and verbal construction through which speakers accomplish the turn's activity.
The organisation of sequences is either question-answer or monologue. The overall structure of
organisation is standard shape or order of phases of implementation of activities through a task
related standard shape, and lastly the social epistemology and relations involve the consideration of
professional cautiousness in interaction such as indirectness and interactional asymmetries such as
the lack of equal participation role (Heritage & Drew, 1992:29).
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

43

Furthermore, Heritage and Drew (1992:3) observe that institutional talk has some formal properties
that distinguish it from other types of conversation. For instance, it can take place face to face or via
a telephone and in physical settings such as a hospital, courtroom or, as it is for this study, in an
educational establishment (classroom). Nevertheless, the institutionality of an interaction does not
depend on the setting but on the relevance of the participants' institutional or professional identities
to the activities they are performing (Heritage & Drew, 1992:3).

2.4.4 Coherence in Discourse and Academic Discourse

Academic discourse, like any other discourse, requires being coherent for easy interpretation.
Transkanen (2006:7) distinguishes cohesion from coherence by arguing that cohesion is about the
identifiable grammatical and lexical elements on the surface of a text forming connections between
parts of it while coherence is outside the text and is a result of the interplay between the hearer or
reader and the text. Concerning how speakers give cohesion to discourse, Gernsbacher and
Jescheniak (1995:24) observe that speakers mark key concepts with certain discourse devices.
According to the authors, concepts are the actions, events, ideas, people and topics about which
speakers talk. They conclude that speakers do the marking of the concepts in order to achieve
coherence. As per Schiffrin (1987:24), the construction of coherence is through relations between
adjacent units in discourse. With regard to how speakers achieve coherence. Taboada (2006:367)
remarks that speakers achieve coherence in discourse by means of different rhetorical relations that
hold together different parts of discourse that are responsible for the coherence of a text. The
recognition of these rhetorical relations by the hearer or reader enables them to assign coherence to a
text. Halliday and Hassan (1976:4) identify three types of cohesion namely, grammatical,
conjunctive and lexical cohesion. The grammatical cohesive devices in English that speakers use to
give cohesion to discourse are use of reference terms, use of substitution, use of ellipsis and use of
conjunctions. The conjunctive cohesive devices include conjunctions and disjuncts while lexical
cohesive devices include repetition, synonyms and antonyms. Reference and repetition are relevant
to this study and as explained in section 2.2.7 under contextual devices and section 4.2 under
propositional discourse strategies respectively.

2.4.5 Cohesive devices in Discourse and Academic Discourse

Communication such as that in lectures hinges upon different devices that give it coherence. The
study on coherence devices has involved different labels. The most used cover term for coherence
devices is the term discourse connectors. Biber (2006:66) defines discourse connectors as devices
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

44

used to bridge between turns (in speech) and sentences, indicating the logical relations among the
parts of a discourse, and providing an interpretative framework for the listener or reader.
Accordingly, Biber (2006:66) distinguishes two types of discourse connectors, discourse markers
and linking adverbials. Discourse markers (cf. Schiffrin 1987) have received different labelling such
as discourse connectives, discourse operators, pragmatic connectives, sentence connectives, and cue
phrases (Fraser, 1999:931). Others have referred to them as discourse particles (cf. Zeevat, 2000;
Stede & Schimitz, 2000). They are lexical items that are syntactically independent, have no
particular grammatical function, do not change the meaning of an utterance, and are somehow
semantically bleached (cf. Biber, 2006; Lee, 2004). In the following section, I present some
literature on discourse markers in relation to the aim of the current study.

2.4.6 Discourse Markers

This study specifically focuses on discourse markers that lecturers at the University of Dar es
Salaam use during classroom interaction to achieve coherence and thus facilitate topic
prominence and continuation. It is argued that discourse markers are restricted primarily to
spoken registers and include words such as ok, well, so, and now (cf. Biber, 2006:66). In
contrast, linking adverbials are found in both spoken and written registers and include words
that function to express different relationships between ideas. The most common types of
relationship between ideas are those showing addition such as moreover, in addition, additionally,
further, further to this, also, besides, and what is more. Others are those that show contrast such as
however, on the other hand, in contrast, and yet. Others show concession such as although, even
though, despite the fact that, in spite of the fact that, and regardless of the fact that. Others show
reason such as because, since, as, and insofar as. Others show results such as therefore,
consequently, in consequence, as a result, accordingly, hence, thus, for this reason, and because of
this (cf. Biber, 2006:66). Concerning discourse markers so and now, Biber observes that in spoken
university registers so is very common and it functions to emphasis a point. (Biber, 2006:66), while
now is used to initiate a new topic to facilitate topic progression (Biber, 2006:69). With that
background, because this study analysed spoken language, it focused on discourse markers in the
sense of Schiffrin's description. It specifically analysed two prominent discourse markers namely so
and now. Schifrin (1987:49) argues that analysing discourse markers is part of the more general
analysis of discourse coherence that is to ascertain how speakers and hearers jointly integrate to
form meanings and actions to make overall sense out of what is said. Studies on the functions of so
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

45

and now indicate that the two discourse markers play a very important role in facilitating discourse
cohesion and topic continuation (cf. Cuenca, 2008; Andersen, 2000; Fraser 1999).

2.4.7 Contextual cohesive devices in Discourse and Academic Discourse

As noted above, communication such as that in lectures flows by use of different cohesive devices.
This section presents contextual cohesive devices that speakers use to create context for their
utterances to facilitate their interpretation. Contextual coherence devices mainly function to index
the relationship between a speaker and hearer in a specific context. Grundy (2000:18) refers to this
property of a small set of words such as personal pronouns, place and time adverbials that assist in
the interpretation of an utterance with reference to the context in which they are uttered, as deixis.
Accordingly, Grungy (2000:26-31) presents three major types of deictic markers namely, person
markers, which are marked by personal pronouns such as (I, you, we), place markers, which are
marked by place adverbials such as (here, there), and time markers, which are marked through
adverbials of time such as (now, then). Although in lectures one can find many instances of all the
three types of deictic markers, this study focused on those that index personal relationship between
the lecturer, students and subject matter. More discussion of these elements will be provided in
chapter four under structural discourse strategies. In section 3.4.8, I provide an overview on the
analysis of classroom discourse.

2.4.8 Analysing classroom discourse

The analysis of classroom discourse has become a prominent topic of academic interest to
researchers in many parts of the world (cf. Hutchby & Wooffitt, 2008; Christie, 2002; Gumperz,
1982, 2001; Edwards & Westgate, 1994; Goodwin & Heritage, 1990; Cazden, 1988; Lemke, 1990).
Edwards and Westgate (1994:3) observe that this growing body of researchers on the language of
classroom interaction has been not only in terms of their academic or professional orientation but
also in terms of the models they have proposed to use in approaching its investigation, as well as the
goals they have sought to achieve. Christie (2002) clarifies that the endeavour has involved
researchers from fields such as ethnography, linguistics (pure, applied and educational) and
psychology, with different resultant models.

2.4.8.1 Historical account

Historically, classroom discourse analysis as an academic endeavour has been a major theme in
many fields of linguistic research, applied linguistics and educational linguistics (Christie, 2002).
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

46

According to Sinclair and Coulthard (1975), the history of the academic interest in the language of
classroom interaction dates back to the 1940s. They specifically remark that in the English-speaking
world for instance, the interest may have begun in the early 1960s and 1970s. Later the
technological invention of the tape recorder and the emergence of video recording facilities
propelled further the interest by facilitating easy access to and analysis of talk (Sinclair & Coulthard,
1975:5).

Wragg (1999:8) clarifies that although it seems that the origin of many classroom observation
approaches are in the early 20th century, there are examples of systematic approaches even before
this time. For example, Wragg (1999:8) notes that in Greece in the 2nd century Dionysius of Thrace
laid down the steps to follow when teaching a literary work. In Rome Cicero and Quintilian
analysed teaching in detail, giving influential prescriptions on delivering a lecture or asking learners
to write sentences in the style of the writer under study. In China in the 5th century one of the best-
known teachers, Confucius, observed his own teaching practices and accentuated the difference
between his duty as a teacher and the duty of learners (Wragg, 1999:8).

2.4.8.2 Research on classroom discourse

The interest in research on classroom discourse began in the 1980s (Duff, 2007; Schleppegrell,
2009). Duff (2007:1) discerns three approaches that have been involved in the endeavour. The first
one is the survey approach, which sought to establish lecturers' expectations in their courses. It
worked through interviews, questionnaires and review of syllabi. The second one is discourse
analysis by which scrutiny was on text and move structure in journal articles in order to compare the
way abstracts, introductions, discussion sections and conclusions were written. The third approach
is functional linguistics (systemic functional linguistics) by which analysis was on textbooks and
classroom discourse with focus on the language of cause-effect and nominalisation. However, all
the three types of approaches predispose themselves towards the written discourse (Duff, 2007:1).
Schleppegrell (2009:4) maintains that "while academic language is sometimes contrasted with
spoken language, it is more appropriate to contrast academic language with 'everyday'
language, as academic language is both spoken and written" In this regard, this study focused
on the spoken academic discourse inherent in classroom discourse evolving from lectures.

2.4.8.3 The structure of classroom discourse

The general structure of classroom discourse has three phases namely opening, body and closing
(Meierkord, 1998). Christie (2002:4) reports that studies on the structure of classroom discourse
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

47

have involved both linguists and non-linguists. Non-linguist pioneers include Flanders (1970) who
sought to establish how teacher talk in the classroom influences learner's achievement. He focused
on discourse strategies such as 'questioning', 'directing' and 'accepting of feelings'. Equally, Bellack
et al. (1966) sought to establish how one could map hierarchically the structure of classroom
discourse. The result was a structure consisting of four units of analysis namely (i) game (ii) sub-
game (iii) cycle and (iv) Move.

Linguists on the other hand, include Sinclair and Coulthard (1975), who borrowed from Halliday's
theory of scale and category grammar (cf. Halliday, 1961) and developed a model of classroom
discourse that involved a hierarchical series of ranks and levels namely Lesson, Transaction,
Exchange Move and Act. After adopting features of 'Move' from Bellack et al. (1966), they further
sub divided it into four types of 'Move'. These are (i) soliciting, which is seeking verbal or nonverbal
response (ii) response, which is a reciprocal relation to the soliciting move (iii) structuring, which is
the setting of a pedagogic activity, and (iv) reacting, which is a move undertaken in reaction to any
of the other three moves. The expansion on 'Move' led into the formulation of what is known as
Initiation Response Feedback (IRF) pattern which Later, Mehan (1979) described as Initiation
Response Evaluation (IRE) pattern. This pattern, though not so anticipated in a lecture method
typical of the target population, it provides a valuable framework for analysing classroom discourse
as unfolds during the interaction between lecturers and students at the University of Dare s salaam.

Specifically, classroom talk as a structured experience has mostly involved ethnographers (cf.
Mehan, 1979; Heath, 1983; Cazden, 1988, 2001). Others are linguists (cf. Sinclair & Coulthard,
1975). Christie, 2002:5) notes that although these two schools of thought work in a similar situation,
they differ in terms of goals. For example, while both ethnographers and linguists are interested in
the language used in the classroom, ethnographers go beyond language by also observing other
aspects of behaviour into which students and teachers engage (Christie, 2002:5). According to
Mehan (1979:126), they venture into aspects such as routines and rules, physical dispositions of
participants in the classroom interaction and movement during the day. In summary Widdowson
(1990:180-190) describes the structure of classroom talk as follows: it lacks balance between
teachers and students because teachers dominate in organising the talk, allocating turns, managing
the topic and provision of content. Resultantly, it becomes characterised by unequal distribution of
power (cf. Cazden, 2001; McHoul, 1990, 1978; Goffman, 1981). This characterisation of is inherent
in the observed lectures as I will explain further in chapter four and five.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

48

2.4.8.4 Functions of classroom discourse

Many scholars have emphasized the importance of communication in a classroom because it is


relevant to the learning process, be it in a monolingual or multilingual context. This is because both
the classroom discourse and the language in which it is undertaken equally matter (cf. Smit,
2010:33). Since the basic purpose of schooling is achieved through communication (cf. Cadzen,
2001:2), classroom discourse can be described as a prototypical form of institutional talk embedded
in and shaping the pedagogical goals of formal education (Smit, 2010:31). A classroom session such
as a lecture is thus characterised by interactional social activities practiced orally to co-construct
continuously evolving and co-existing discursive structures (Heras, 1994:295). Therefore,
classrooms are central cells of schooling, an important process in a nation's macro developments
and national budgets (Smit, 2010:20; Christie, 2002:2). Thus classroom discourse forms one
specific kind of language social activity, which is in turn, is affected by the language involved,
which comprises three sub-languages namely the language used in the teaching and learning
process, the language being taught as subject and the languages of daily communication (Dalton-
Puffer, 2007).

Gumperz (1982:1) views communication as a purposeful action rather than a mere production of
well-formed sentences. The insights gained from previous studies on academic discourse were vital
in investigating how lecturers of the University of Dar es Salaam make use of discourse resources
available to them to achieve the activity goals of teaching. Wells (1996:74) observes that although
classroom interaction mainly occurs through spoken discourse, the relationship between the
discourse and the activity goals it is intended to achieve is rarely scrutinised or treated as a matter of
conscious choice. For example, it is generally noted that teachers dominate talk in a typical
classroom interaction (Cazden, 2001; McHoul, 1978; Goffman, 1981). However, teacher
dominance in talk during classroom interaction could be regarded as a means and not an end in
itself. This is because verbal communication in such a setting is not primarily a means of
domination, but is ideally taken as a means towards the achievement of knowledge transfer and
skills development (Wells, 1996:75). This idea is supported by Fairclough (2001:27-28) who
regards institutional interactions such as classroom interaction as social practices which include four
dialectically related elements namely the productive activity, the means of production, the social
relations, and social identities.

Wells (1996:75) regards classroom interaction as a joint activity, which involves three things. These
are the activity itself, which is identified by the motive or objective that provides its driving force
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

49

such as the goal of educating. Another is the action, which entails the means by which the activity is
translated into reality, such as the delivery of a lesson. The last is operation, which involves the
particular means that participants use to achieve the goal of action, such as the different strategies
that participants employ when they realise that the goal is not appropriately attained (Wells,
1996:76). These characteristics of classroom interaction compose the context that determines
academic achievement of students (cf. Leibowitz, 2005:661ff).

Since learning is a socialisation process that is mediated by language (Ochs, 1986:3), teachers are
charged with creating the conditions for successful socialization of learners. In that endeavour,
teachers need strategies that help them coordinate academic task structure and social participation
structure (Erickson, 1982; Michaels & O'Connor, 1993). However, this coordination is undertaken
with a view toward a larger goal: the creation of a shared classroom culture that facilitates students'
engagement with the relevant academic content (O'Connor & Michaels, 1993:318).

2.5 BILINGUALISM AND BILINGUAL EDUCATION

Corson (1990:159) notes that bilingualism is a common phenomenon in many countries. He reports
situations such as East Africa, India and China where many people learn more than one language
from their earliest days of their life. He further comments that not only is bilingualism common, but
also multilingualism is the norm in many bilingual societies. In this respect, Corson (1990:159)
notes the presence of more than 130 languages on the Congo River in West Africa, which overlap
with one another in different contexts. Moreover, he reports that in Papua New Guinea, people with
advanced higher education might have learnt up to five or six languages, with English, the medium
of instruction, coming last in the list. However, Corson (1993:72, 1990:160ff) acknowledges the
impossibility of having a balanced bilingualism situation by arguing that most bilingual speakers
use the weaker languages for limited purposes in specialised activities such as commerce, education
or work, meaning that they cannot operate in both languages with equal proficiency in daily settings.

The following sections provide an overview of bilingualism and bilingual education in relation to
how the concepts contribute to the understanding of classroom practices by bilingual teachers.

2.5.1 Bilingualism

Definitions of the concept 'bilingualism' have varied among researchers and theoreticians (cf.
Hamers & Blanc, 2000; Cummins & Swain, 1986). They range from a native-like competence in
two languages to a minimal proficiency in the second language; thus lacking precision and
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

50

operationalism. Most of these definitions ignore non-linguistic dimensions of language use (Hamers
& Blanc, 2000:7).

Moreover, Cummins and Swain (1986:7) categorise the definitions of the concept 'bilingualism' into
three major features. These are features such as language users, language acquisition and domain of
language use. Scholars under the first category include for example, Macnamara (1967) who defines
a bilingual as a person who possesses at least one of the four language skills (listening, speaking,
reading and writing) even at a minimal level in their second language. Another scholar is Ostreicher
(1974) who defines a bilingual as a person who possesses a complete masterly of two different
languages without interference between the two. The last is Bloomfield (1933) who defines a
bilingual as a person with a native-like control of two or more languages.

Scholars in the second category include Osgood and Sebeok (1965) who define a bilingual with
regard to the age of second language acquisition (simultaneous versus sequential, early versus late)
and Stern (1973) who defines a bilingual in terms of the context of acquisition of the two languages
(compound versus coordinate, artificial versus natural). The last category in the list include scholars
such as Fishman (1968) and Oksaar (1983) who define a bilingual in terms of the domains in which
he or she uses language. The last category bears relevance with this study as is elaborated in the
following section.

2.5.2 Bilingual Education

As it is the case for bilingualism, defining bilingual education is equally a complex endeavour.
Some people regard it as education offered to students who are already speakers of two languages or
education of those who are studying additional languages (García, 2009:5). However, scholars view
that there should be a distinction between bilingual education and foreign language teaching. For
example, Nemetz Robinson (1978) states that:

Bilingual education is distinguished from foreign or second language education,


including the study of community languages, in that bilingual education is the use of a
non-dominant language as the medium of instruction during some part of the schooling
day (Nemetz Robinson, 1978:8).

With regard to the role of language in bilingual education, García (2009:22) argues that central to
bilingual education is the concept 'language' itself because language is both the medium through
which school subjects are taught and is also an important subject studied in schools. Building on
Nemetz Robinson's (1978) idea, García (2009:126) clearly distinguishes between bilingual
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

51

education and language programmes by stating "… bilingual education uses the target language as
the medium of instruction whereas language programmes simply teach the language as a subject".

The above distinction implies a lot about bilingual education programmes in situations where the
language that many students are fluent in does not acquire the status of LoI. It better suits societies
with immigrant communities who form minority language speakers groups. These minority
language minorities fall under three categories. According to Corson (1993:73), the first category is
the 'ancestral' language minorities such as the Maori, and American Indians. The second category is
the 'established' minority languages such as the Catalans in Spain, the Canadian Francophone
communities in Ontario. The third category is the 'new' minority languages such as those of legal
immigrants, refugees, foreign workers and expatriates.

Regarding the social attributes associated with bilingual education, García (2009:22) observes that it
regularly takes place in languages with disparate power and positions. The situation is true in the
higher education system in Tanzania that does not allow Kiswahili, the dominant language; to play
the role of LoI instead allows English, the non-dominant language, to do so. The major discrepancy
is that in Tanzania English does not only function as LoI, it is also a curriculum subject. Corson
(1993:71) argues in favour of a minority language that, "… when a language spoken by a minority
is not used in schooling either as a means of instruction or as a curriculum subject, then it means that
the language is not valued". This implies that in Tanzania English is valued for its use as LoI in
post-primary education. Corson (1993:72) further comments "… an education system serving a
multicultural society but providing only monolingual schooling exercises power unjustly, or is being
used to exercise power unjustly". This assertion rightly reflects the situation in Tanzania although
this study does not seek to investigate the interplay between language and power in Tanzania.

Any educational policy needs to specify its goals, approaches and target level of schooling. In
relation to that requirement, Genesee (2004:2) defines bilingual education at three levels, linguistic
goals, pedagogical approaches and levels of schooling. Essentially bilingual education refers to the
programmes prepared for majority and minority language students (Genesee, 2004; Blanc &
Hamers, 2000; Cummins & Swain, 1986). The majority language students who enrol in the
programmes are members of the dominant socio-cultural groups such as the case of English in
Canada and North America (Cummins & Swain, 1986:33) and Japanese in Japan (Hamers & Blank,
2000:7). The minority language students who enrol in schools are members of minority language
groups such as the case of Spanish in the United States of America (Genesee, 2004:2). Generally
Bilingual education aims to promote bilingual or multilingual competence by using both or all
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

52

languages as media of instruction for significant proportions (50%) of the academic curriculum
(Genesee, 2004:2). The following section comprises a description of different models of bilingual
education.

2.5.3 Models of bilingual education

Scholars in different places of the world have proposed different bilingual education models for
different populations with varying needs and motives. With regard to goals and outcomes of
bilingual education, Roberts (1995:371) specifies that bilingual education operates within specified
goals and expected outcomes, and he identifies three types of such goals namely, national or
societal, linguistic or educational. The national or societal goals can be either assimilationist or
pluralistic. Linguistic goals include such constructs as language acquisition and language learning
while educational goals include practices such as immersion and submersion schooling. Equally, the
outcomes can be either additive bilingualism by which a second language is added to the first and
both languages are maintained or subtractive bilingualism by which the addition of the second
language results into loss of the features of the first language (García, 2009:52). This situation
prevails in Tanzania where most children lose some of their mother tongue skills as they enrol into
primary school where they acquire Kiswahili during primary school education because the policy
favours it as LoI. Thereafter, after completing primary school education they lose Kiswahili skills as
the policy favours English as LoI throughout secondary school up to university level. The literature
on bilingual education presents various terminologies for the different bilingual education models in
operation. The following sections describe six models namely immersion bilingual education
model, submersion bilingual education model, transitional bilingual education model, maintenance
bilingual education model, pullout and sheltered bilingual education model, and enrichment
bilingual education model. Thereafter, the models are collapsed into two models in the manner of
Garcia (2009) before they are discussed in relation to higher education.

2.5.3.1 Immersion Bilingual Education

Edwards (2004:138) observes that historically this model resulted from a small group of parents in
St. Lambert suburb of Montreal in the 1960s. The parents, after realising that the proficiency in
English would soon be essential for future economic survival, they decided to consult with scholars
of bilingualism from McGill University who then proposed a model for immersion of English-
speaking children in French for the first years of schooling. Edwards (2004:138) further reports that
the model operated by a gradual introduction of the majority language (English) until half of the
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

53

curriculum became English and half became French. It was speculated that the model would cater
for both ancestral and established languages for the benefit of English speakers.

Regarding the goals and outcomes of the model, Roberts (1995:377) observes that they depend on
how the immersion takes place. If it happens with the majority English speakers learning a minority
language, the goal of immersion bilingual education becomes pluralistic and the outcome becomes
additive bilingualism. In contrast, if it happens with the minority English speakers learning the
majority language, the goal of immersion bilingual education becomes assimilationist and the
outcome becomes subtractive bilingualism.

Because this model does not practise grammar translation, repetition and drills, it helps strengthen
the concepts taught in one language across the two languages in order to provide cognitive
challenge (cf. Thomas & Collier, 1997). Other values are that the model provides development of
dual language skills that cater for the need for higher level of competence to read social studies texts
or solve mathematics problems in about 5-7 years (cf. Johnson & Swain, 1997). The model also
encourages the development of students' native language thus contributing to language heritage and
maintenance (cf. Garcia, 2009; Corson, 1993). Lastly, the model allows language minority students
to remain in the classroom with their native English-speaking peers, thus availing linguistic and
social cultural advantages (Christian, 1996).

2.5.3.2 Submersion Bilingual Education

Roberts (1995:372) associates the model with the educational approach of mainstreaming non-
native English speaking students into regular English speaking classrooms, particularly in the
United States of America. The goal of the model is assimilative since it intends to have the non-
native speaker learn English and assimilate to North American society. The model's outcome is
subtractive bilingualism because it does support the first language thus resulting into its loss. This
model has a number of psychological disadvantages including students feeling marginalised and
consequently dropping out (Roberts, 1995:372).

2.5.3.3 Transitional Bilingual Education

Roberts (1995:374) observes that this model provides content area in the student's native language
while teaching him or her English. The goal of the model is assimilationist while the outcome is
subtractive bilingualism. The advantage of this model is that it facilitates a quick transition to the
mainstream English only classroom and it allows students to use their primary language as a vehicle
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

54

to develop literacy skills and acquisition of academic skills in the primary language (Roberts,
1995:374).

2.5.3.4 Maintenance Bilingual Education

Roberts (1995:374) notes that this model differs from the previous models in both goals and
outcomes. As in transitional programmes, this model transits learners into English content classes
while giving support to them in their first language. The difference from the other models is that
maintenance bilingual education model offers language arts to learners in their first language thus
enabling them to become literate in that language while continuing to receive content area classes in
their first language so that they become literate in both languages. The goal of the model is to
promote bilingualism and bi-literacy and because it promotes development of both languages, its
outcome is additive bilingualism (Roberts, 1995:374).

2.5.3.5 Enrichment Bilingual Education

Roberts (1995:375) refers to this model as a two-way, or developmental bilingual education model.
This model, particularly in the United States, involves both native and non-native speakers of
English in the same classes in the early stages contrary to the case for immersion programmes in
Canada. Therefore, in this model, there is a balance between minority language and majority
language students and instruction is in both languages with the non-English language, taking half of
the time (Edwards, 2004:139). Like maintenance bilingual education, enrichment bilingual
education has a pluralistic goal, the development of bilingual and bi-literate individuals while
retaining the value of both languages. The outcome is additive bilingualism for both minority and
majority language speakers (Roberts, 1995:375). The advantage of the model is the promotion of
high academic achievement, second language development and cross-cultural understanding
(Edwards, 2004:139).

2.5.3.6 English as Second Language (ESL) Pullout and the ESL Sheltered Model

Last in the list of Roberts (1995) models of bilingual education is the combination of two models.
The first one pulls out students of other classes in order to offer them English as a second language
class. The other model is the one that combines ESL and content area classes. Time duration in the
former model may range from twenty minutes to several hours of contact (Roberts, 1995:373). Like
submersion and transitional models, ESL Pullout model has assimilationist goal with additive
bilingualism outcome (Roberts, 1995:373). As for the case of the latter model, ESL and teaching of
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

55

the combined areas is by trained ESL subject area teachers or a team thus the model provides more
accessibility to the classes than in the mainstream (Roberts, 1995:373). Additionally, there is the use
of additional materials, bilingual aides, and adapted texts and so on in order to facilitate acquisition
of both content and language by students of diverse language backgrounds (Roberts, 1995:373). As
is the case for submersion, transitional and ESL Pullout models, ESL sheltered model is also
assimilationist with a resultant subtractive bilingualism outcome (Roberts, 1995:373).

In summary, all the models fall under two distinctive categories as either pluralistic or
assimilationist with their respective outcomes as additive bilingualism or subtractive bilingualism.
Except for the immersion model, which can be either pluralistic or assimilationist depending on the
mode of immersion (majority language speakers into minority language speakers and vice versa),
others, that is submersion, transitional, and the ESL Pullout and ESL Sheltered models are purely
assimilationist while maintenance and enrichment models are purely pluralistic.

According to García (2009), all the models described above can fall into two major groups,
traditional and modern. Traditional models are additive and subtractive while modern ones are
recursive and dynamic. As mentioned above (cf. 2.5.3), additive bilingual models result into
additional language while subtractive models result into loss of former language skills or features.
Recursive bilingualism occurs through a revitalisation of once suppressed practices, such as for
example, the case at the University of Dar es Salaam whereby Kiswahili is gaining more public
spaces even in academic affairs such as workshops and writing of dissertations. Lastly, dynamic
bilingualism occurs when different form of language shift and bounce back depending on the
context in which language use develops and functions.

Although the models of bilingualism and bilingual education described above pedagogically
relate mostly to language teaching and at mostly lower levels of education particularly in the
early years of life, they practically embody a lot of preparatory value that later in life of an
individual can help him or her find way in and play a role in higher education. Views on
higher education, as it is the case for other constructs such as bilingualism, bilingual education
and so on, are prolific. For example, Marginson (2006:1) views higher education as a
complex combination of different types of networks and educational systems in different
historical, legal, cognitive, financial, spatial and temporal contexts shared within and cross
borders and shaped by competition.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

56

Moreover, bilingualism and bilingual education relate to higher education in that they provide a
foundation to an individual for an envisaged challenge that lies ahead of him or her in terms of the
influence of the world's affairs such as economics, politics and education itself. Illustrating the
situation in which higher education is today, Marginson and Rhoads (2002:282) contend:

In our view, the world in which we now live takes us beyond the conceptual confines of
current comparative higher education scholarship. Today, higher education in every
corner of the globe is being influenced by global economic, cultural, and educational
forces, and higher education institutions themselves (as well as units and constituencies
within them), are increasingly global actors, extending their influence across the world.
Moreover, the political, economic, and educational contours of countries (and of
regions and continents), are being reshaped by regional trading blocs that lead higher
education to become more similar across national boundaries and more active in
regional markets. Finally, at the same time, these global forces press upon higher
education, the legitimacy of nation states and of national higher education systems that
express national cultures are being challenged by movements to preserve and promote
local cultural identity and independence. The prevailing model and concepts neither
capture nor explain these dimensions of higher education.

Bilingual education programmes in higher education are being implemented in different parts of the
world. For example, since the year 2003 in South Africa there has been an additive bilingualism
programme at the University of Limpopo. The programme provides a BA degree in Contemporary
English Language and Multilingual Studies. The Contemporary English Language Studies
component is taught and assessed in Sesothosa Leboa while the Multilingual Studies component is
taught and assessed in English (Joseph & Raman, 2006:4). As Genesee (2004:1) remarks,
worldwide, competence in more than one language is an issue of personal, socio-cultural, economic
or political significance. Thus, this reality attracts different views about bilingualism. Some people
view it as a problem to be overcome while others view it as a challenge that should be managed to
benefit individuals, communities or even nations. Since in the modern world bilingual and
multilingual skills are becoming more necessary than ever before, schools have an important role to
play in providing such skills Genesee (2004:1).

The definition of a bilingual according to the domain of language use (Fishman, 1968) is relevant to
the goal of this study. The goal is to investigate how bilingual speakers such as university lecturers
use language in the academic domain to attain the academic goal of teaching mostly majority
language (Kiswahili) speaker students who are learning in a minority language (English).
Specifically, the study focuses on how the lecturers utilise their bilingual competence in the
endeavour of teaching. Genesee (2004:2) uses the term bilingual competence to refer to the ability
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

57

to use the target language effectively and appropriately for authentic personal, educational, social
and work related purposes.

2.6 ENGLISH AS LINGUA FRANCA (ELF)

The English language is increasingly holding a global position in almost all aspects of human life
because of economic, academic and social benefits associated with it. This influence of the English
language manifests itself not only in former British colonial societies but also in once culturally
closed societies such as Asian countries. The following sections describe the history, influence and
interest in the phenomenon of English as lingua franca in many parts of the world where
intercultural communication is required.

2.6.1 History and definition

House (2003:557) traces the origin of the term lingua franca to the Arabic term 'lisan-al-farang', a
term that originally Arabs and Western European traders used to communicate. Later its meaning
broadened to describe the language of commerce, which is a rather stable variety with little room for
individual variation. However House (2003:557) Notes that the meaning is not applicable to the
global English of today acclaimed for its functional flexibility and spread across many different
domains.

As regards the definition, Mauranen (2003:513) defines a lingua franca as "a vehicular language
spoken by people who do not share a native language" while Jenkins (2008:4) simply defines it as a
way of communicating in English between speakers who have different languages. Jenkins (2008)
finds that ELF differs with English as Foreign Language (EFL) in four major ways. Firstly, while
EFL belongs to the group of foreign languages, ELF belongs to a group called world Englishes.
Secondly, while EFL regards the English of non-native speakers of English as defective, ELF
regards the same as a difference. Thirdly, while EFL uses the metaphors of 'transfer', 'interference'
and 'fossilisation', ELF uses the metaphors of 'contact' and 'evolution', and lastly, while EFL regards
code- switching and code mixing as interference errors, ELF regards them as bilingual resources.

2.6.2 Influence of English as lingua franca

There is a notably rapid growth in international contacts and communication in recent years in
almost all domains ranging from politics, trade and technology to tourism, education, entertainment
and the internet (Kaur, 2010:111). According to Kaur (2010:111), this situation has necessitated a
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

58

need for a common language for successful communicative outcomes with English as the language
preferred by a great majority of the people involved in international interactions. Crystal (2003) and
Jenkins (2003) observe that this choice is not only understandable but also expected. This is in view
of its position as a "global language" (Crystal, 2003) and an "international language" (Jenkins,
2003). Björkman (2008:103) further comments that English today is frequently used as an
international means of communication among its non-native speakers from different first language
backgrounds and research on ELF has already revealed commonalities and common processes from
a variety of settings. Björkman (2008) thus recommends for a continued research and description of
lingua franca usage in different environments.

Nonetheless, Kaur (2010:192) reveals a pending question despite the rapid growth in international
contacts worldwide, with English increasingly becoming the chosen medium to facilitate
communication among people of diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds. The question regards
how non-native speakers of English of varying levels of proficiency and who use different varieties
of English, are able to arrive at mutual understanding in this medium. This question also bears the
interest of the current study.

2.6.3 Interest in English as Lingua Franca

Mauranen (2003) summarised the interest in ELF research that has developed recently due to global
use of English in virtually all public domains, under three major categories. These are (i) a
theoretical interest in the structure and use of ELF in different domains, (ii) a descriptive approach
which pays attention to distinguishing features of the form and functions of ELF, and (iii)
applications of new insight regarding ELF to specific domains, such as the domain of higher
education. Theoretical ELF studies take an interest in the nature of English as contact or vehicular
language that generally emerges where interlocutors do not share a first language. When English is
an L2 to one or more of the interlocutors, it would at some point have been formally taught to the
interlocutors. When it is used as a lingua franca, English is characterised by simplification and
negotiation features, which interlocutors apply to approximate what they believe to be acceptable
patterns of the language (Mauranen, 2003:515). The descriptive studies take an interest in the core
elements of English in ELF such as the standard syntactic, phonological and semantic elements that
interlocutors assume to be inherent in British and American varieties of English (Mauranen,
2003:516). Lastly, applications of insights in ELF entail the integration of theoretical and descriptive
work on ELF. In this endeavour, it deems necessary to set achievable learning goals through
educational goals themselves and people's language rights as well as efficiency. That is, firstly,
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

59

educational practices should allow speakers of a foreign language to comfortably speak it and
secondly, there should be no attempts to set a Native Speaker model for international users as this
sounds both counterproductive and unachievable (Mauranen, 2003:517). In applied fields such as
the present study, McCarthy (2001) suggests that it would be important to identify other standards
than Native Speakers standards and work to identify the criteria for English use in different cultural
contexts. The assumption guiding this study was that lecturers' language competence differed
significantly with that of students, hence the possibility of lecturers attempting to modify it to suit
the level of their students.

2.6.4 Studies on English as Lingua Franca

The number of studies on the use of English as lingua franca in different situations is large enough
to allow one to describe the attention scholars are directing towards the analysis of the influence of
English in the world. For example, Firth (1996) conducted a study on turn taking, sequential
relations and topic management in telephone conversations among employees of companies in
Denmark. Meierkord (2000) conducted a study on the structure of discourse, particularly the use of
turn taking and non-verbal cues in university student dinner small talk conversation while Lesznyák
(2002) analysed the development of topic management skills in interactions in meetings among
international students. Others have studied the use of pronouns and modal verbs as solidarity
strategies among university lecturers (Milne, 2006), a study on how repetition and questioning help
in the signalling and prevention of misunderstanding (Maurannen, 2006). There is also a study on
repetition, paraphrase and various confirmation and clarification procedures as communication
strategies for achieving mutual understanding among students pursuing an international Master's
degree at a university level (Kaur, 2010). Further studies include the study on discourse pragmatic
patterns in discourse among international students of Hotel Management (Smit, 2010) and the study
on code switching in academic discussions during a conference (Klimfinger, 2007). The last set is of
the study on phonological features which cause intelligibility problems and those which do not
(Jenkins, 2000); and the study on morpho-syntactic non-native usage features from university
students' work group sessions and lectures at university level (Björkman, 2008).

The studies described above bear both difference and similarity with the present study in many
ways. For example, while all analyse spoken discourse as this study does, some are in academic
settings (Meierkord, 2000; Lesznyák, 2002; Milne, 2006; Maurannen, 2006; Klimfinger, 2007;
Kaur, 2010; Smit, 2010) while others are in non-academic settings (Firth, 1996; Jenkins, 2000).
Among those investigating ELF in academic settings, some involved the uses of English by non-
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

60

native foreign students alone (Kaur, 2010; Meierkord, 2000) while others involved such language
use by students and lecturers (Björkman, 2008; Smit, 2008, 2010; Klimfinger, 2007; Milne, 2006).

The studies that relate to the present one are specific in terms of the nature of data they used as well
as the discourse elements they analysed. For example, Smit (2010) focused on discourse pragmatic
patterns in a live classroom interaction among international students registered for a Hotel
Management course. The aspect of discourse on which Smit's study focussed, was the use of repair
in ELF. Second, Kaur (2010) established how repetition and paraphrase function as discourse
strategies to facilitate understanding among users of ELF. Third, Maurannen (2006) study
established how the use of repetition and questioning could signal and subsequently assist in
preventing misunderstanding. Fourth, Klimfinger (2007) investigated how speakers in academic
settings code-switch to facilitate communication, and lastly Milne (2006) established how university
lecturers use modal verbs, adverbs, qualifiers, hedges and pronouns as solidarity strategies.

2.6.5 English as a lingua franca in academic discourse

Bjorkman (2011:950) remarks that English has become the overwhelmingly dominant language in a
large number of domains today, among them being academia. A similar idea is put forward by
Haberlandt (2011:937) who observes that English is a very special language in that it has many
more non-native speakers than native speakers, and that it is used in far more settings where there
are no native speakers present than settings occupied largely by native speakers. Haberlandt
(2011:937) points out that many of these settings are within contexts of higher education, due to
increased transnational student mobility, university teacher mobility and offshore delivery of
university education.

Björkman (2011) conducted a study on spoken English as a lingua franca (ELF) usage in Swedish
higher education that involved lectures and student group-work to investigate the role pragmatic
strategies play in the communicative effectiveness of English as a lingua franca. Findings showed
that lecturers in ELF settings make less frequent use of pragmatic strategies than students who
deploy these strategies frequently in group-work sessions. Previous studies (Björkman, 2010, 2008a,
2008b,) showed that students experienced problems in the use of standard forms of English at
morphosyntactic level although the problems did not have a negative effect on the students' group
work.

From the above exposition, it is obvious that in academic settings the role of English has become
deeply entrenched. It is not only a language used in accommodating foreign nationals at
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

61

international universities; it is also used in academic writing to the extent that most scholarly
journals worldwide publish research outcomes in English only. The execution of academic affairs in
countries with people who are not native speakers of the language has become so well-established
that instead of attempting to replace EFL, it would be better to foster it, also considering how it can
be integrated in a bilingual educational system where local languages have at least a facilitating
function.

2.7 REPETITION AS PRACTICE IN CLASSROOM COMMUNICATION

Literature on classroom discourse analysis indicates that there are various types of repetition. Three
major such types are 'self repetition', by which the speaker repeats whole or part of his or her own
previous discourse (cf. Allwood et al., 1990; Leftein & Snell, 2011), 'other repetition', by which the
speaker repeats whole or part of the respondent's discourse (cf. Knutson, 2010). The third is
'resumptive repetition', by which the speaker resumes to a previous discourse after some sort of
discourse digression (cf. Qiuick, 2007). With regard to function, Tannen (1989:47ff) regards
repetition as an unmarked communicative behaviour that enables speakers to communicate
smoothly and at the same time reduces the load of information listeners have to process. Concerning
teacher self-repetition, Viaño and Conejos, (1996:129) emphasise that repetition in classroom
interaction is just as functional and communicative as it is in other less structured kinds of discourse.
They further note that teachers repeat themselves in order to increase the amount of input especially
when giving information and correcting (Viaño & Conejos, 1996:133). Knutson (2010:15) finds
that repetition has a massive contribution to a successful interaction. Viaño and Conejos, (1996:134)
present a list of the functions of teacher self-repetition. According to them, teacher self-repetition
functions to achieve cohesion, to perform self-repair, to fill gaps, to emphasise a point to provide
and ask for information, and to facilitate turn taking. Quick (2007:1), similarly considering the
functions of repetition, just collapses all the separately identified functions of repetition into two
main actions, namely as ones serving to give prominence and achieve cohesion.

2.8 QUESTIONING AS A PRACTICE IN CLASSROOM COMMUNICATION

Literature on classroom interaction indicates that there are various types of questions based on
purpose, form and function. There are two types of questions according to purpose namely display
questions, asked when the teacher knows the answer but wants to challenge students' memory and
referential questions, asked when the teacher does not know the answer (cf. Long & Sato, 1983;
Mehan, 1979). Another popular binary division of questions is based on form and relates to the open
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

62

versus closed question types (Barnes, 1969) or, more elaborately, the yes versus no questions, wh-
questions, tag questions and alternative questions (cf. Biber et al., 1999). Lastly, Long and Sato
(1983) provide three types of questions in relation to function namely, comprehension check
questions, confirmation check questions and clarification check questions. Athanasiadou (1990)
expands this division into four types of questions namely information questions, rhetorical
questions, examination questions and indirect requests questions.

Regarding levels of questioning, Dalton-Puffer (2007:93) conceptualises questioning at individual


and educational levels. At individual level, questioning satisfies an individual's passion to know
something while at an educational level it helps synchronise the knowledge needs of large groups of
people thus making students aware of previous challenges in the society and how previous
generations have solved them. Concerning the function of questioning, it is observed that teachers'
use of questions facilitates engagement of learners in the instructional interaction and helps check
comprehension of complex concepts by students (cf. McCormick & Donato, 2000:183). Essentially,
questioning is taken to form the master key to understanding (Harvey & Goudvis, 2000:81).

Dalton-Puffer (2007:96-97) clarifies that whereas the possible answers for closed ended questions
are limited to a simple one word answer thus making them quick and easy to answer, open ended
questions allow a more extensive and demanding on the part of the respondent. Dalton-Puffer
(2007:97) further observes that closed ended questions relate more with yes/no-, true/false-questions
such as in multiple-choice answer. Open-ended questions on the other hand typically begin with wh-
words. However, she notes the difficulty in attempting to establish a clear-cut demarcation between
closed and open-ended questions.

Nevertheless, since most literature on questioning as a discourse strategy is not about classroom
interaction in tertiary education (cf. Mwinsheikhe, 2009; Rubagumya, 2008; Dalton-Puffer, 2007),
the data in such studies cannot comparably reflect the occurrence patterns of questioning at a
university level. This is because the kind of teaching in lectures does not follow the dialogic
teaching style, as is the case for lower levels of education.

According to Tsui (1995:25), teacher questioning plays a special role by boosting classroom
interaction through the stimulation of students toward the content elements. In large group lectures,
however, listener participation is not easy as there are too many hearers to allow meaningful
reciprocal conversational interaction. Then the uninvited participation of a hearer is often taken to be
more disruptive than constructive.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

63

2.9 CODE SWITCHING AS PRACTICE IN BILINGUAL COMMUNICATION

Remarkable work on the use of more than one language in teaching and learning, particularly at
tertiary level, has recently been added to the literature on teaching and learning in multilingual
settings (cf. Banda, 2003; García, 2009). Additionally, linguistic studies on language choice and use
that report the regularity of code switching among bilingual teachers have been conducted at both
lower level of education (Shin, 2010; Uys, 2010; Rose, 2006; Mwinsheikhe, 2009; Rubagumya,
2008) and higher levels of education (cf. Taha, 2009; Li, 2008; Zabrodskaja, 2009, 2008, 2007),
with comparatively similar results.

Poplack (2001:262) refers to code switching as the act of bilinguals or multilingual speakers of
mixing two or more languages in discourse, often with no change in interlocutor or topic. Moreover,
(Gumperz, 1982) recognizes code switching as a discourse strategy for bilinguals. Among its
functions are to make quotations, to facilitate address specification, to introduce interjections, to
assist in making reiterations, to effect message qualification, and to express involvement in the
message or social and cultural group in context. Specific to classroom interaction Zabrodskaja
(2007:124) observes that bilingual teachers use two languages to teach the academic content. They
switch between the languages spontaneously or intentionally. They further may decide when to
code switch in order to facilitate comprehension and meaningful involvement (Zabrodskaja,
2007:124).

The studies at tertiary level include the one on code switching between Arabic and English at the
University of Khartoum (cf. Taha, 2009), the study on code switching between Cantonese and
English at the Hong Kong Institute of Education (Li, 2008), and the study on code switching
between Estonian and Russian at Tallinn University (Zabrodskaja, 2009, 2008, 2007). All these
studies show that bilingual lecturers use two languages to teach the academic content by switching
between the languages spontaneously or intentionally. Specifically the studies show that lecturers
use code switching to facilitate comprehension and meaningful involvement of students
(Zabrodskaja, 2007:127) and to achieve communicative goals such as effective classroom
interaction, topic change and solidarity with students (Taha, 2009:336). The other purpose is to
achieve communicative goals, such clarification of difficult concepts, introduction and or
consolidation of students' bilingual lexicon, and reduction of social distance with students' in order
to assist them psychologically (Li, 2008:84).
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

64

2.9.1 Types of Code switching

Gumperz (1982:60) distinguishes two major types of code switching namely situational and
conversational code switching as elaborated in the following sections.

2.9.1.1 Situational code switching

The situational code switching, sometimes equated with 'diaglosia' (Ferguson, 1959) involves
alternation between two languages in different situations. These situations differ in terms of three
elements. The first is according to the setting of the speech event such as home, school, or work
place. The second is according to the activities at hand such as a public speaking or special
ceremonials. The third is according to speakers involved in the speech event such as friends, family
members or strangers. Notable is the fact that speakers must know more than one language but they
employ only one language at a time (Gumperz, 1982:60). Furthermore, the norms for the selection
of in situational code switching are stable with taught rules that govern their use (Gumperz,
1982:61).

2.9.1.2 Conversational code switching

Gumperz (1982:59) refers to conversational code switching as the juxtaposition within the same
speech exchange of passages of speech belonging to two different grammatical systems or
subsystems. It is different from situational code switching because it occurs within a single sentence
with the aim to reiterate a message or to reply to someone's comment. Accordingly, Poplack
(2001:262) refers to this kind of code switching as intra sentential code switching. Unlike situational
code switching, conversational code switching is guided by norms of code selection, rules
governing their use and the means of checking for conformity to the norms that form part of the
same minimal speech act (Gumperz, 1982:61).

Studies have shown that although code switching and code mixing is actively discouraged in
academic settings, teachers in Tanzania have been using it (cf. Mwinyinshehe, 2009). Therefore, it
is unlikely that in a context as multilingual as the one at the University of Dar es Salaam, there
would be no use of or reference to community languages other than English. Therefore, this study
also attended to the possibility of lecturers drawing on or allowing the use (even if just informally)
of indigenous languages such as Kiswahili in the course of lectures.

Blommert and Gysels (1987:14-15) reported that in Tanzania Kiswahili-English code switching was
a common in-group tendency among the faculty at the University of Dar es Salaam. However, today
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

65

the phenomenon is no longer clandestine because, as hinted upon in chapter one, the faculty switch
between the two languages even at conferences and seminars.

2.9.2 Code switching in academic discourse

Code switching in academic discourse is a phenomenon that many scholars have studied and
documented. The following observation by Lehtonen et al. (1999) clarifies the situation:

Embedded in the idea of teaching through English is that all course-related activities not
only reading requirements take place in English: lectures are delivered in English,
essays are written in English, required reading is in English and exams are set and taken
in English. However, it is likely that the reality does not necessarily correspond with the
idea. Many learning-related activities are likely to take place in the native language(s)
of the students and teachers. Therefore, teaching through English does not necessarily
equal learning solely through English (Lehtonen et al., 1999:2).

From the above definition, one can infer that as Zabrodskaja (2007:127) observes, bilingual teachers
use two languages to teach the academic content. They switch between the languages spontaneously
or intentionally. They further may decide when to code switch in order to facilitate comprehension
and meaningful involvement.

With regard to how code switching occurs in academic discourse, Ljosland (2010) conducted a
study about everyday language use at a Norwegian university. The study covered six language use
situations namely lectures, lab work, examinations and dissertations, E-learning activities, social
interaction, and situations relating to the student democracy such as elections of their
representatives. Explaining about the results, Ljosland (2010) argues as follows:

The resulting picture of everyday language use within these situations was that none of
the listed activities could be described as being monolingually in English. Lectures
were held in English, but surrounding activities such as student discussions and
problem solving, student questions and conversations immediately before and after
lectures were observed to take place both in Norwegian and in English. Overhead foils
and PowerPoint presentations used in lectures were mostly in English, but were
observed to contain Norwegian texts now and then (Ljosland, 2010:104).

Furthermore, a study on Cantonese-English mixed code analysing the major reasons why mixed
code is so difficult to avoid, both inside and outside the classroom, Li (2008) established that
educated Chinese Hongkongers find it difficult to resist using some English in their informal
interactions with others in Cantonese, resulting in mixed code Li (2008:1).
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

66

Accordingly, Li (2008:1) advises that instead of banning mixed code indiscriminately, a more
proactive and productive approach would be to conduct empirical research with a view to (a) better
understanding the circumstances under which classroom code-switching is necessary, (b)
identifying pedagogically sound and productive code-switching practices, and (c) disseminating
good code-switching practices through demonstrations, workshops, and teacher-training Li
(2008:1).

2.9.3 Types of code switching

Although not limited to academic discourse, literature documents various types of code switching.
For example, Hughes et al. (2006:8) present four types of code switching. The first is borrowing,
which is the using of a single word from the embedded language similar grammatically but lacking
in the matrix language to explain the meaning that the matrix language does not have. The second
type is Calque, which involves a literarily translation of an expression from another language
without using a proper syntax. The third type is inter-sentential code switching, which involves
alternating languages between sentences, and the fourth is intra-sentential, which involves
alternating languages within sentences. In this study, the last two types of code switching were
analysed.

2.9.4 Reasons for code switching

Like it is the case for any other speech genre, there are several reasons for code switching (cf.
Crystal, 1987; Cook, 2003). These include compensatory code switching, which occurs when a
speaker lacks the appropriate term in the matrix language due to psychological factors such as
anger, tiredness or distraction. The second is solidarity and or exclusion code switching which
occurs when an individual wishes to express solidarity with a particular group. Another reason for
the switching is attitudinal code switching which occurs when an individual wants to express his/her
attitude to the listener. Skiba (1997) observes that code switching is not language interference on the
basis that it supplements speech. Where it is used due to an inability of expression, code switching
provides continuity in speech rather than presenting interference in language.

2.10 SUMMARY

This chapter has presented an overview of the literature pertaining to research relevant to discourse
strategies found in classroom discourse. It has presented the conceptual framework by defining the
term 'conversation' and then described the conversational features of language use. It provided a
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

67

definition for the term 'discourse' followed by a description of the discursive features of language
use and discourse types. It also touched on the properties of spoken discourse. It conceptualised the
concepts CA and DA as a theoretical framework for this study. The reasons for combined use of CA
and DA devices were given. Conversational features and discourse strategies were described,
specifically giving a review of work on conversational features of lectures, organisation of lectures,
and formal coherence features in discourse. Definitions were given of discourse strategies and their
analysis, and specific studies of discourse strategies in the language of classroom interaction, with
attention to multilingual contexts, were reviewed. Further relevant literature on the function of
English as an academic lingua franca, bilingualism and bilingual education and code switching was
introduced. The chapter also described models of bilingual education and elucidated their relevance
to higher education. The next chapter describes the research methodology that this study adopted to
collect and analyse the data.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

68

Chapter Three

RESEARCH PARADIGM, DESIGN


AND METHODOLOGY

3.1 INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, I present a detailed account of how I conducted this study. In section 3.2, I describe
the research paradigm adopted. I also explain its meaning, functions, types, distinction and the
rationale for the adoption of the research paradigm. In section 3.3, I introduce the research paradigm
adopted for this study and I explain its nature and application. In section 3.4, I describe the research
design and in section 3.5, I describe the population, sample and sampling procedures adopted in the
collection of data. I explicate the data collection process by specifically explaining the interview
schedule, sets of data, type of interview conducted, reasons for selecting such a type of interview
and the setting for the interviews. I also present the profile of the research participants as well as
clarify how I processed and analysed data. I specifically state the sources of data, the transcription
process, the organisation of transcripts and the coding process. I close the section by explaining how
I interpreted the data. In section 3.6, I report on the ethical considerations that were required for this
study and how these were met, and in section 3.7, I present some of the limitations that I
encountered while conducting this study. In section 3.8, I provide summary of the chapter.

3.2 RESEARCH PARADIGM

3.2.1 Meaning of the term research paradigm

There have been different definitions of the term paradigm in literature on research methodologies
(cf. Guba, 1990; Patton, 1990; Kuhn, 1970). The Webster Dictionary has defined it as "an example
or pattern; small, self-contained, simplified examples that we use to illustrate procedures, processes
and theoretical points" (www.merriam-webster.com). Kuhn (1970:43ff) defines it in terms of the
underlying intellectual assumptions and structures that intellectual communities share and upon
which they base research and development in a field of inquiry. It has also been defined as a
worldview, a general perspective, a way of breaking down the complexity of the real world and as
an interpretative framework, which is guided by a set of beliefs and feelings about the world and
how it should be understood and studied (Guba, 1990:17). These beliefs and feelings are basic in the
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

69

sense that they are mere human constructions not open to any conventional proof to establish their
truthfulness (Guba & Lincoln, 1994:107-108). The kinds of belief that define a paradigm have been
categorised into three types. The first type is identified as ontological beliefs, which are concerned
with the question of what is real. The second type is identified as epistemological beliefs, which
focus on knowledge and the process of acquiring and validating it. The last type is identified as
methodological beliefs, which are concerned with how we come to know about the world or gain
knowledge of it (cf. Krauss, 2005; Trochim, 2000).

Moreover, Baptiste (2001:7ff) identifies two more categories of beliefs that distinguish different
kinds of paradigms namely beliefs in causality and in axiology. Beliefs regarding causality are ones
that refer to the nature and possibility of causal relationships between entities, while beliefs
regarding axiology are about issues of value. Value is a crucial aspect of research that has a role that
a researcher should scrutinise since values play a role in deciding how to best use research outcomes
and products (Baptiste, 2001:8).

3.2.2 Functions of research paradigms

Literature on research methods has documented different functions of research paradigms. For
example, Dills and Romiszowiski (1997:105ff) present five functions of paradigms. Firstly,
paradigms define how the world works, how knowledge can be extracted from this world, and how
one is to think, write and talk about this world. Secondly, paradigms define the types of questions to
ask and the methodologies to use in answering them. Thirdly, paradigms decide what to publish and
what not to publish. Fourthly, paradigms structure the world of academics; and fifthly, paradigms
provide insight into the meaning and significance of the world. In summary, Husen (1999:31)
remarks that paradigms determine the criteria according to which one selects and defines problems
for inquiry and how one approaches them theoretically and methodologically.

3.2.3 Types of research paradigms

As it is the case for the definition of the term paradigm itself, there are various descriptions of
research paradigms. Largely, literature refers to two fundamental research paradigms. These are the
quantitative and the qualitative research paradigms. The former is referred to as scientific and the
latter as interpretative or humanistic (Walker & Evers, 1999:41). On the one hand, the quantitative
research paradigm is modelled on the natural sciences with an emphasis on empirical, quantifiable
observations, which lend themselves to analyses by means of mathematical tools. Outcomes of
quantitative methods leave the researcher with the task of establishing causal relationships to
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

70

explain what is statistically represented (Husen, 1999:32). The qualitative research paradigm, on the
other hand, derives from the humanities with an emphasis on holistic and qualitative information
and interpretive approaches (Husen, 1999:32).

3.2.4 Distinction of research paradigms

Three distinctions of research paradigms are interesting in deciding on a suitable approach for
investigating a given question. Firstly, Husen (1999:36) distinguishes between quantitative and
qualitative research paradigms by arguing that the quantitative research paradigm is linear,
consisting of straightforward rational action toward preconceived problems. Conversely, the
qualitative research paradigm leaves room for interpretation and reshaping of the problem during
the process of dialogue prior to action and even during action (Husen, 1999:32).

Secondly, Popkewitz (1984:35) presents a three-way distinction of research paradigms. The first is
'Empirical-analytic', which corresponds to the quantitative research paradigm. The second is the
'Symbolic', which corresponds to the qualitative research paradigm, and the third is the 'Critical'
paradigm, which the author does not discuss in depth. Generally, a critical approach is one that
considers specifically how social power relations are embodied in any context, and it aims to
disclose how values are articulated in various systems. It is reflective in that it provides a knowledge
that is both enlightening and emancipatory (cf. Geuss, 1981:12).

Thirdly, Lincoln and Guba (1985:105) present the 'Paradigm Eras' distinction. This three-way
distinction is based on the periods in which certain sets of basic beliefs have guided inquiry. The
eras are the Pre-positivist, Positivist and Post-positivist paradigm eras. According to the Positivist
paradigm, science is a value free entity that operates through simple and secure observations while
viewing knowledge with exclusion of moral, political and value judgements (Walker & Evers,
1999:42).

From the above exposition there seems to be an obvious link between the positivist view and the
quantitative research paradigm. There has been heated debate as to whether quantitative or
qualitative research is the more appropriate paradigm for social research. Kerlinger (1973:401)
describes qualitative research as deficient because it does not have objectivity, rigor and scientific
controls, which can produce the requisite generalisations to build a set of laws of human behaviour.
He further finds that it cannot apply adequate tests of validity and reliability. For such a perspective,
knowledge has to be value free, while qualitative research (as also critical theoretical research) is
value laden. In answer to the criticisms of researchers such as Kerlinger, a qualitative research
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

71

approach agrees with the contention of quantitative researchers that it is difficult to capture the
knowledge of human affairs by statistical generalisations and causal laws, because such knowledge
always has a subjective element. Therefore, it has a different aim, namely to grasp the meanings of
actions, the uniqueness of events and the individuality of persons (Walker & Evers, 1999:44).

3.3 THE PRESENT STUDY

This study is a qualitative research project, which corresponds to the definition of (Berg, 2009:317)
who defines qualitative research as attending to the meanings, concepts, definitions, characteristics,
metaphors, symbols and descriptions of things. It answers questions by examining various social
settings and individuals who inhabit these settings. Cassell and Symon (1994:7) present six defining
characteristics of any qualitative research. Such research focuses on interpretation rather than
quantification. It emphasises subjectivity rather than objectivity. It is flexible in the process of
conducting research. It is oriented towards the process rather than the outcome. It is concerned with
context, thus it regards behaviour and situation as inextricably linked in forming experience; and
finally, it explicitly recognises the impact of the research process on the research situation. For
example, this paradigm allows for in-depth research into how people make sense of the way they
conduct themselves through symbols, rituals, social structures and social roles. Moreover, it has
interpretivist research characteristics (cf. Creswell, 2009; Babbie & Rubin, 2007). Generally, it has a
concern for the individual and it seeks to understand the subjective world of an individual's
experience (Babbie & Rubin, 2007; Cohen et al., 2001).

As for the relationship between qualitative research and social sciences, interpretivism works with
social sciences by dealing with people and their institutions (Bryman, 2001:13). Unlike positivism,
which uses quantitative methods to formulate objective procedures for data collection (Babbie &
Rubin, 2007:25), interpretivism endeavours to deeply understand people's lives by focusing on their
inner feelings while trying to interpret individuals' daily experiences and the idiosyncratic reasons
for their behaviours (Babbie & Rubin, 2007:25). It particularly seeks to reflect the distinctiveness of
human action rather than emphatically understand the forces that act on the environment (Babbie &
Rubin, 2007:25; Bryman, 2001:13). It is therefore suitable for this study due to the nature of data
sought and analysed, my main interest being in how lecturers make use of the variety of linguistic
resources available to them in the teaching and learning process at a tertiary education level. This
study is interested in how, in a very specific multilingual context, certain choices are made and
certain strategies are followed, decidedly or intuitively, to manage a remarkable set of
communicative challenges. In order to gain an understanding not merely of a list of possible
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

72

strategies that can superficially be encountered, but also of how individual responses are articulated
and justified, a limited non-representative data sample had to be used. This marks the study as
qualitative rather than quantitative.

3.4 RESEARCH DESIGN

3.4.1 Definition

Different scholars give different definitions of concepts such as paradigm, design, method, and so
on, sometimes using these terms interchangeably. For example, what some have referred to as
research paradigm, others have referred to it as research design. For instance, Creswell (2009:3) (in
considering distinctions similar to those discussed above in section 3.2.3) describes three types of
research design namely qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods, yet somewhere else scholars
refer to qualitative and quantitative as concepts to be treated as paradigms (cf. Walker & Evers,
1999; Husen, 1999). In this study, I refer to the qualitative versus quantitative approaches as
different research designs since my intention is not to participate in what some researchers have
referred to as "paradigm wars" (cf. Kohlbacher, 2005:1)

The primary question that I had to answer was whether the particular questions for investigation
justify qualitative or quantitative research or both. Neuman (2006:160) observes that qualitative or
quantitative research designs are different in many ways but that they complement each other as
well. They are not polar opposites or dichotomies; rather they represent different ends in a
continuum (Neuman & Benz, 1998:8ff; Creswell, 2009:3).

However, as Creswell (2009:3) recommends, a researcher has to make decision on which research
design suits his or her study well. Creswell (2009:3) lists some of the basics that underlie the choice
of a particular research design. These are the worldview of the researcher, procedures or strategies
of inquiry, specific methods of data collection, analysis and interpretation. Others are the nature of
the research problem, the researcher's personal experience and the audience for the study (Creswell,
2009:3).

The research problem about how lecturers draw on their language skills in delivering the content of
the subjects they are teaching focused my study. I sought to establish the variety of discourse
strategies that the lecturers actually use in classroom communication and thereafter to ascertain what
kinds of discourse patterns best characterise the current teaching process. In the process I also
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

73

wanted to establish how lecturers reflect on the multilingualism of students and on the ways in
which linguistic resources are invoked (or not) in the tertiary learning process.

Thus, I sought also to explain how lecturers exploit multilingualism even when English is the only
official LoI. In order to achieve such objectives, I required qualitative methods of sampling, data
collection, analysis and interpretation. These methods included purposive sampling, observation,
interviewing and use of qualitative data analysis tools such as Discourse Analysis, Applied
Conversation Analysis and Qualitative Content Analysis. Consequently, with the needs described
above for this study, I decided to select a method that I considered would be able to address the
specific needs. In deciding on how to go about answering the research questions, I chose case study
research design, which I describe further in the following section.

3.4.2 Case study research design

3.4.2.1 The nature of case study research design

According to Umit (2005:2), a case study refers to the collection and presentation of detailed
information about a particular participant or small group, frequently including the accounts of
subjects themselves. As it is the case for many concepts used in research, different scholars have
referred to the concept case study differently. Some authors have referred to it as case study research
(Tellis, 1997), others have referred to it as case study strategy (Eisenhardt, 1989), case study method
or case study methodology (Umit, 2005), and case study approach (Creswell, 2009), just to mention
a few examples. For the sake of this study, without engaging in terminological conflicts, I adopt the
term case study research design as a research technique provided within the qualitative research
paradigm to study the way lecturers of the University of Dar es Salaam utilise linguistic resources at
hand to conduct the educational activity of teaching in a multilingual setting.

Scholars describe a case study research design as one of the qualitative research methods together
with ethnography and participant observation (cf. Welman et al., 2005:193; Mouton, 2001:60; Bell,
1999:10). It is regarded as a method of empirical enquiry that investigates a contemporary
phenomenon in depth and within its real life context (cf. Mouton, 2001; Bell, 1999; Yin, 1994). It
allows for examining of relatively complex phenomena, with units of analysis varying from
individuals to class groups. It also permits an examination of simple or complex phenomena, with
units of analysis varying from single individuals to corporations and businesses (Berg, 2009;
Creswell, 2009; Welman et al., 2005; Yin, 2003). Bell (1999) recommends this method for
individual researchers like me because it gives an opportunity for investigating one aspect of a
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

74

possibly multifaceted problem, such as the language of classroom interaction (alongside a range of
other variables that affect students' participation and progress) at the University of Dar es Salaam,
for study within a limited time scale.

3.4.2.2 Application of case study research design

Welman et al. (2005:193) note that a case study research is much more than a mere description of
observed phenomena. It seeks an understanding of the uniqueness and idiosyncrasies of a particular
case in all its complexity. It aims to investigate the dynamics of bounded single-bounded system
(such as the University of Dar es Salaam), which is typically of social nature involving different
types of participants such as those in the project of teaching. Therefore, a case study research can
function at many stages with different purposes. For instance, it can serve as a follow up endeavour
to and put flesh on the bones of a survey. It can also precede a survey and function as a means of
identifying key issues that merit further investigation (Bell, 1999:11). Moreover, it can occur as a
freestanding exercise, like the present study, in which the researcher identifies an instance, which in
itself justifies dedicated attention and systematic analysis. Such an instance could be the
introduction of a new syllabus, the way a school adopts a new role, or any innovative stage of
development in an institution (Bell, 1999:11). Since each organisation, such as an educational
institution like the University of Dar es Salaam, has its own common and unique features, the case
study aims, as Bell (1999:11) notes, to identify such features, show how they affect the
implementation of systems and how they influence the organisation's functions. Furthermore, as
Welman et al. (2005:194) suggest, this investigation has to take place through an on the spot
fieldwork under the natural circumstances of the specific case.

Welman et al. (2005:194) further recommend that research should appropriately define or
demarcate the cases in focus, not merely describe them, but rather inductively search for recurring
patterns and consistent regularities. Finally, the research should triangulate methods of observation
to discern these patterns. This is because the number of cases under study is limited, while the
purpose of case study is to examine these available cases intensively (Welman et al., 2005:194).

The term triangulation as a research strategy was coined by Webb et al. (1966) to refer to the use of
multiple methods of data collection or differing methods of data analysis in a manner that allows the
researcher to relate findings acquired by different means (cf. Henning et al., 2004). Later, Denzin
(1978:294-307) discussed the concept in detail in relation to how to triangulate. He came up with
four types of triangulation namely data triangulation (including time, space and person), investigator
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

75

triangulation, theory triangulation and methodology triangulation. Campbell and Fiske (1959:101)
suggested a similar method called "multiple operationism". Their argument is that the inclusion of
multiple sources of data collection in a research project is likely to increase the reliability or
accuracy of the observation (Mouton, 1996:156; Neuman, 2006:150). According to (Neuman,
2006:150), triangulation means "observing from different viewpoints". It can be done at several
levels such as the triangulation of measures whereby researchers take multiple measures of the same
phenomena, which can be illustrated, for example, when a teacher asks students to answer essay
questions, complete multiple-choice items, and make oral presentations on a single topic. Then the
teacher has three different sources, which, ideally, should give results that support and confirm
findings obtained from different perspectives. Another example is found in the triangulation of
theory, whereby a researcher uses multiple theoretical perspectives in planning the stages of the
research or in interpreting the data. Lastly, there is the triangulation of method whereby a researcher
mixes qualitative and quantitative styles of research and data (Neuman, 2006:149-50).

For this particular case study triangulation was done at two levels, namely at the levels of data
collection and of data analysis. In data collection, three methods were used, namely (i) video and
audio recording, (ii) observation, and (iii) semi structured interviews. However, it should be noted
that the observation data was not analysed because there was no significant difference between the
data and the information drawn from the video recording. At the level of data analysis the data were
analysed and interpreted using selected techniques and analytic devices presented by Applied
Conversation Analysis (ten Have, 2001), Discourse Analysis (Cook, 1989; Stubbs, 1983; Brown &
Yule, 1983) and Content Analysis (Busch et al., 2005). Therefore, to explore intensively the
language of classroom interaction as one aspect of the tools of teaching and learning at the
University of Dar es Salaam, I found a case study research design to be appropriate. My purpose
was to understand how lecturers draw on diverse linguistic resources in teaching and assuring
students' access to new learning material at the University. I particularly sought answers to questions
on not only what the discourse strategies are that the lecturers of the University of Dar es Salaam
use during classroom interaction, but also on how and why they use them. Although a case study
only very limitedly allows for the generalisation of findings, such a single case may provide pointers
as to processes that customarily are treated as common-sense ones, that perhaps are less so; or to
approaches that are overtly denied, but in practice turn out to be common and productive. Thus,
even a case study can give new insights that justify our doubting received wisdom and that will
prompt further investigation in a productive direction.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

76

3.5 POPULATION, SAMPLE AND SAMPLING PROCEDURE

3.5.1 Population

I conducted my research at the University of Dar es Salaam. As noted earlier under section 1.6.3,
Tanzania has eighteen accredited universities (TCU, 2012). The University of Dar es Salaam is the
oldest and largest, with four colleges, two institutes and six schools, spread across the five campuses
of the University. The population for this study comprised selected groups of students and academic
staff members of the University of Dar es Salaam. Berg (2009:317) recommends a population like
this for a study like the present one because it is easily accessible to the researcher, the target
population is one of specific interest, and the site contains all the necessary sources of information to
answer the research questions.

Notably, the University of Dar es Salaam, like all other higher learning institutions in the country,
follows the English only mode of classroom interaction policy. Thus, all lecturers and students are
required to use English in all academic interactions, both written and oral. Hence, regardless of the
actual findings, all the research participants were required, as a policy regulation, to use English
throughout all the lecture sessions.

3.5.2 Sample and sampling procedure

I adopted the purposive sampling procedure for this study. Berg (2009:317) recommends this
sampling procedure for an exploratory study like this because it allows a researcher to use his or her
knowledge or expertise about a given group to select subjects who represent the population. For that
reason, as a lecturer in the College of Arts and Social Sciences (formally the Faculty of Arts and
Social Sciences), this sampling procedure suited my study.

The college was the focus of the study because it was appropriate in both setting and population. It
is the second oldest academic unity at the University, after the School of Law (formally Faculty of
Law), but it is the largest both in terms of teaching staff and number of students. It hosts eight
departments of which two formed a sample for this study.

Thus, by purposive sampling, the departments of Political Science and Public Administration
(PSPA) and the department of Sociology and Social Anthropology (SSA) provided participants for
this study. This selection was made because at the time of the conception of this study they were
among the largest in the college in terms of the number of registered students. The teaching of their
courses is mostly through the lecture method. This method was appropriate for the cases I chose,
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

77

which are lectures and lecturers (not students and seminars). I was confident that they would most
likely provide as wide a spectrum as possible of the specific communicative and discourse strategies
likely to occur in the large classrooms of the university. The selection involved four lecturers from
each department, who taught first year classes. This also applied for the courses in which recordings
were done, namely, first year course lectures thus assuring that all courses were taught at university
entrance level (although in one case the lecturer was teaching a third year course to first year
students). After I had done preliminary observations, I realised that there were cases where two
lecturers were co-running one course. Co-incidentally, the lecturers paired on senior and junior level
of appointment. In such cases, I decided to observe and interview both lecturers in order to attain as
wide a range as possible of the discourse strategies under observation. Cases like this were evident
in both target departments. For the Department of PSPA, there was one case where the senior
lecturer was a male, while the junior one was a female assistant lecturer. In the other case, there was
a senior female lecturer and a male assistant lecturer. For the Department of SSA there was one such
case, where one assistant lecturer who was about to submit his Doctoral dissertation was co-running
a course with a colleague who had just completed his Master's degree. As I did for the Department
of PSPA, I decided to observe and interview both lecturers as well. Therefore, the data-sample
consisted of eight lecturers and their lectures in six courses. Overall, the whole sample consisted of
three male Senior Lecturers, one female Senior Lecturer, three male Assistant Lecturers and one
female Assistant Lecturer. Both female lecturers were from the Department of PSPA. I could not
find a female participant from the Department of SSA who was teaching first year courses by the
time of the research, thus regarding gender I did not have equal numbers. Nevertheless, the sample
is representative of the general distribution of males and females in these two departments.

3.5.3 Data collection

3.5.3.1 Schedule

The data collection process began in November 2010. During November to December, 2010 I
sought research clearance from the authorities of the University of Dar es Salaam. I identified
potential participants, met them, clarified the purpose of the research project and received signed
informed consent from some of them. Then I made appointments with them concerning actual data
collection dates. During January to March 2011, I collected audio-visual data by audio-visually
recording selected lectures as well as by observing classroom activities. During March to April
2011, I previewed the collected data and identified points for discussion. Then I set interview
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

78

appointments with the respective participants. During March to May 2011, I crosschecked the data
to ascertain if it suitably met the purpose of my research.

3.5.3.2 Sets of data for the study

As stated earlier under section 1.6.3, I needed three sets of data to answer the questions for this
study. These were (i) data on discourse strategies that are used by lecturers during classroom
interaction with students (ii) data on how and how regularly the lecturers use such discourse
strategies and (iii) data on the lecturers own reflection on the use of such discourse strategies
considering the variety of linguistic resources of themselves and their students.

For the first and second sets of data, I attended selected lectures as had been decided, and made field
notes on my observations. I also recorded these lectures for later transcription and analysis with a
view to identifying and assessing various observed discourse strategies. I used two instruments to
record the lectures, a voice recorder and a video recorder. My purpose in using two recorders for
each session was to assure security of data in case any problem occurred with one of the devices.
This triangulation of tools of data collection proved very useful in safeguarding the data. It would
have been wasteful, or even impossible to request another recording from the participants had
anything gone wrong with the recording process, as a lecture cannot be repeated simply for the sake
of a research project such as this one, and (according to the prior agreement) there were limited
opportunities to actually record live, authentic lectures.

For the third set of data, following my attendance and recording of the lectures, I interviewed the
respective lecturers in order to gain introspective information from them on their use of the observed
discourse strategies during lectures. Before the interview began, I explained to each interviewee
what the purpose of my study was, the procedures of the interview, the intended use of the data and
time length for the interview. The interview schedule consisted of five sections namely a section on
information about general career and education background and a section on information about
discourse strategies observed in the lectures. Others were section on the opinion that participants
had regarding the Language of Instruction at University level in Tanzania, and lastly a closing and
summary of the interview. The interviews were semi-structured in that they focused on the interests
of the project as set out in an interview schedule, but would also allow open discussion where a
lecturer chose to highlight what they found to be of primary importance.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

79

3.5.3.3 Type of interview

Mason (2002:62) notes that the interview is probably the most commonly used method in
qualitative research. In this study, I adopted a qualitative interview technique. Conducting a
qualitative interview is a process that requires detailed planning, including having a predesigned set
and sequence of questions (Mason, 2002:67). This technique allows for in-depth attention to
selected topics, by means of loosely structured forms of interview (Mason, 2002:62). It is also
characterised by interactional exchange of dialogue, relatively informal style, a thematic, topic
centred, biographical or narrative approach with fluidity and flexibility of structure, which allows
the interviewer and interviewee to develop unexpected themes during the interviewing process
(Mason, 2002:63). This responds to a set perspective of qualitative research that knowledge is
situated and contextual. For that reason, the function of the interview is to ensure that it brings into
focus all relevant contexts to produce the situated knowledge (Mason, 2002:64). Thus, such a
qualitative interview involves the construction and reconstruction of knowledge, rather than the
excavation of knowledge (Kvale, 1996:3).

3.5.3.4 The reason for using a qualitative interview technique

I decided to use the qualitative interview technique because I wanted to have a full picture of the
situation that I was exploring. I found that observation and text analysis of the lectures only would
not suffice to provide me with a rounded picture of the situation. Principally, I sought answers to
questions pertaining to the background of the research participants, their use of other discourse
strategies apart from the ones I observed in the lectures, and their opinion regarding the LOI issues
at the University of Dar es Salaam and in Tanzania as a whole. Besides, I sought to explore the
lecturers' perceptions concerning the discourse strategies that they used during classroom
interaction, the reasons for using them, and how they believed the strategies were helpful in
transferring knowledge to and developing insight among students. I also wanted to establish what
their preferences and explanations were regarding LOI at university level. To do all this, I took the
ontological position that lecturers' perceptions form social realities (Mason, 2002:63), which I
sought to explore. Mason (2002:63) further postulates that the legitimate way of generating data on
such ontological perspectives, is to talk with participants interactively, to ask them questions, to
listen to them, to gain access to their accounts and articulations or to analyse their use of language
and their construction of discourse.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

80

Furthermore, my decision to use qualitative interviewing was based on my aim to collect data that
would generate meaningful knowledge. According to Mason (2002:68), to achieve this aim, a
researcher does not collect data (excavation) but generates it (construction). Therefore, qualitative
interviewing operates with the model of knowledge construction rather than one of
straightforwardly excavating already deposited reserves of knowledge (Mason, 2002:68). It involves
asking questions that focus more on lived experiences than hypothetical scenarios or abstract
concepts (Mason, 2002:64-68).

3.5.3.5 Setting for the interviews

I conducted the interviews in two different venues, in my office and in the participants' offices.
Interviews with LPsc.2, LSoc.3 and LPsc.3 took place in my office. This is because most offices of
lecturers are shared spaces that would affect privacy during an interview session. The office I was
occupying at the time of the research was located in a very tranquil place and I was sharing it with a
newly recruited Tutorial Assistant who was willing to allow me time to conduct interviews in
privacy. Therefore, I invited the lecturers to my office rather than conduct the interview in their
working space, and they agreed to it readily.

Regarding the language of the interviews, the language policy for tertiary education and the general
practice in academic discourse on campus was followed thus most of the interviews were conducted
in English. However, three participants opted to use Kiswahili during the interview sessions. Two
interviews in Kiswahili involved one male Senior Lecturer, one male Assistant Lecturer while the
third involved a female Assistant Lecturer. Since all the three interviewees preferred responding in
Kiswahili, I did not object to their choice. Section 3.5.4 presents the profile of each lecturer-
participant in my research.

3.5.4 The profile of each of the research participants who took part in this study

3.5.4.1 LPsc.1

This was a female Senior Lecturer in the Department of Political Science and Public
Administration. She did her BA and MA at Villanoval University and PhD at the University of
Duquesne. She had been teaching at the University since 1993. Additionally she had a certificate
and diploma in education but she had not attended any on job teaching methodology programme.
She also taught courses to second and third year students at the University of Dar es Salaam.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

81

3.5.4.2 LSoc.1

This was a male assistant lecturer in the Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology. He had
worked at the University of Dar es Salaam since 2000 as a Tutorial Assistant assisting by going to
classes with lecturers, supervising seminars and teaching when asked to do so by his seniors. He did
undergraduate studies at the University of Dar es salaam specialising in BA sociology from 1997-
2000. After finishing undergraduate studies in 2000, he was engaged as a teaching assistant in the
Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology. This teaching Assistantship was coupled with
Masters' degree Scholarship in the same year and he completed studies in 2002. Thereafter he was
confirmed to work as an Assistant Lecturer in 2003. In 2004, he was awarded another scholarship to
the University of Umea in Sweden where he went for another masters' degree in public health. He
completed the programme in 2005. By the time of this study, he was in the last stages of his PhD at
the University of Radbound in Netherlands. The participant had never trained as teacher at any stage
nor had he attended any teaching methods course. He also taught courses to second and third year
students at the University of Dar es Salaam. He preferred to have the interview in Kiswahili.

3.5.4.3 LSoc.2

This was a male senior lecturer in the Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology. He had
been teaching at the University of Dar es salaam since October 1992 when he was appointed as an
Assistant Lecturer. Before that, he had taught at the Institute of Social Work in Dar es Salaam
teaching Industrial Relations, Sociology and Research Methods courses. This was between 1978
and 1980. He did his BA at the University of Dar es Salaam between 1975 and 1978 and MA at the
same university of between 1988 and 1991. In 1994, he went for Doctoral studies in Austria at the
University of Higabes Jeokerm, Linz; and finished in 1997. After returning from studies, he
continued with teaching in the Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology of the University
of Dar es Salaam until the time I was collecting data for this study. The courses he had been
teaching include Gender and Gender Relations, Sociological Theories, Industrial Relations and
other courses as the need arose. The lecturer as well had never trained as teacher at any stage nor
had he attended any teaching methods course. He also was also teaching other courses to second
and third year students at the same university. He also preferred to have the interview in Kiswahili.

3.5.4.4 LPsc.2

This was a female assistant lecturer in the Department of Political Science and Public
Administration. She studied BA and MA at the University of Dar es Salaam. She trained as teacher
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

82

at undergraduate level and had had some teaching experience from Teaching Practice programme,
which is compulsory for all students doing Education courses at the University of Dar es Salaam.
She had also volunteered to teach after she had finished Form Six and she had taught for three
months in a public school where she had been appointed after completing undergraduate studies.
She later was appointed as Tutorial Assistant in the Department of Political Science and Public
Administration a post that was accompanied with MA scholarship. During the time she was doing
MA, she also supervised undergraduate seminars, an occasion that she feels added to her teaching
experience. Likewise, she had never attended any teaching methods course organised by the
University of Dar es Salaam. By the time of the research, she was also teaching courses to third year
students. She also preferred to have the interview in Kiswahili.

3.5.4.5 LSoc.3

This was a male assistant lecturer who had, at the time of the interview (April 2011), been teaching
in the Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology for about five years since January 2007
when he was appointed as Tutorial Assistant. He pursued both BA and MA at the University of Dar
es Salaam. He had never trained as teacher but he had attended teaching methods course organised
by the University of Dar es Salaam to lecturers who had never trained as teachers to equip them
with some methodological skills. He also taught courses to second and third year students at the
University of Dar es Salaam.

3.5.4.6 LSoc.4

This male Senior Lecturer had been teaching at the University of Dar es Salaam since 1971. At
undergraduate level, he studied at the University of Dar es Salaam training as a teacher (BA with
education) and he specialised in Linguistics and Sociology. He went on and pursued an MA
(Sociology) at the University of Paris and a PhD (Sociology) at the University of Hull. He had had
teaching experience outside Tanzania when he went to teach at the University of Hull on exchange
programme. He had also taught in Secondary Schools in Tanzania. Nevertheless, he had never
attended any teaching methods course at the University of Dar es Salaam. He also taught courses to
second and third year students at the University of Dar es Salaam.

3.5.4.7 LPsc.3

This was a male Assistant Lecturer in the Department of Political Science and Public
Administration. He had been at the Department since 2008 working as Tutorial Assistant mainly
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

83

supervising seminars to undergraduate students until 2010. In 2011, he was assigned classes to teach
on his own. He taught courses to second and third year students. By the time of data collection, he
was co-running a course with LPsc.1. He had attended a teaching methods course co-organised by
the University of Dar es Salaam and the University of Sussex, UK.

3.5.4.8 LPsc.4

This was a male Senior Lecturer in the Department of Political Science and Public Administration.
He had served in the education system of Tanzania for 32 years holding different positions such as
Ward Education Coordinator, District Education Officer and had taught in colleges of education, in
Focal development Colleges and in Community Development Colleges. He joined the university as
a mature student. He did MA programme at the University of Dar es Salaam in Political Science
and Public Administration. After that, the University of Dar es Salaam appointed him as a Teaching
Assistant in 1993 and he did his PhD in Manchester.

3.5.5 Data processing and analysis

In this section, I discuss briefly how, methodologically, I went about the whole process of data
analysis that I undertook during the execution of this study. I mainly talk about the sources and
forms of data for this study. I further elucidate the theoretical expositions that guided the data
analysis as well as demonstrate the steps I followed to analyse the data.

The data were analysed and interpreted using techniques and analytic devices presented by
Conversation Analysis (Psathas, 1995; ten Have, 2001) and Discourse Analysis (cf. Cook, 1989;
Brown & Yule, 1983; Stubbs, 1983). These two approaches allowed for Content Analysis (Busch et
al., 2005) that gave insight into the coherence of the particular subject material and topic of the
lectures. A detailed discussion of these theoretical frameworks for analysis of various forms and
aspects of linguistic communication is given in Chapter two. The use of these research tools for
analysing the meanings and relationships articulated in classroom discourses and in interviews that
topicalized such discourses, allowed reliable reconstruction of the events under investigation in
terms of content and structure. I transcribed the various recordings, coded them according to specific
recurring discourse strategies and so identified manageable categories on a variety of levels. Finally,
I triangulated the coded information on discourse strategies and their uses in lectures, with interview
and observation data to gain as complete an impression as possible on the discourse strategies used
in classroom interaction in this multilingual educational setting. Lastly, I uploaded the data to
Qualitative Data Analysis software (NviVo) for content analysis.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

84

3.5.5.1 Sources of data

The sources for the qualitative data for this study were lectures and interviews.

3.5.5.2 Transcription

Interviews that were conducted in English could be directly transcribed. However, for the three that
were done in Kiswahili, the transcriptions had to be done in two stages, namely first a transcription
of the Kiswahili version, and then a translation (with gloss where necessary) of the transcriptions
from Kiswahili into English. Four assistants all selected on voluntary basis from the Department of
Foreign Languages and Linguistics of the UDSM assisted in transcribing all the eight lectures and
interviews. There were two female assistants and two male assistants in the process. Two of them
were Assistant Lecturers and two were Tutorial Assistants in the final stages of their MA degrees.
One female Assistant Lecturer had already enrolled in a PhD Programme. Hence, volunteers who
were studying and working in the same field as the researcher did the transcription. This assured
accuracy of the transcripts. Nevertheless, I had to go through the transcripts while listening to the
recordings or watching the videos to mitigate human error. Finally, I produced the final drafts for
analysis.

3.5.5.3 Organisation of the transcripts

Before I began coding the transcribed data, I systematically organised the information about
participants to order the sets of data. First, I opened a casebook in which I placed the cases, thus
creating a unit for each of the selected Lecturers, coded as LPsc.1, LPsc.2, LPsc.3, LPsc.4, LSoc.1,
LSoc.2, LSoc.4 and LSoc.4. Second, I classified the cases according to distinctive attributes such as
gender. Third, I assigned attribute values to the cases, referring to each participant's designation,
academic rank, and years of teaching experience, professional training, other qualifications and
other university classes that each one taught. These attributes are often referred to as the "meta-
data", the information that assists in recognising features that may be important as variables that co-
determine communicative patterns. "Designation" referred to professional level of a participant at
the time of the recording, namely their appointment as a Tutorial Assistant, Assistant Lecturer,
Lecturer, Senior Lecturer, Associate Professor, and Professor. "Academic rank" referred to
academic credentials of a participant such as holding a Bachelor's Degree, Master's Degree, or
Doctoral Degree. The "experience" attribute value ranged from 0-05 years, 05-10 years, 10-20
years, 20-30 years, and more than 30 years. Under the "professional training" attribute, I sought
information regarding the participants' specialisation at undergraduate level and under the "other
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

85

qualifications" attribute I sought information about whether the participant had attended any
teaching methodology course, or had any other qualification apart from the university degree.
Finally, under the "other classes taught" attribute I sought information regarding other classes a
participant taught apart from the first year group. This category provided essential information when
comparing how the use of strategies varied according to the level of learners.

Moreover, I organised the transcripts into files and labelled them according to the respective cases. I
labelled each lecture according to the sequence in which I had recorded it. Therefore, the first
lecturer from the Department of PSPA had the label "LPsc.1" and so on while the first lecturer from
the Department of SSA had the label "LSoc.1" and so on. For the interviews, I gave similar labels
with a slight change, thus I labelled the interview with the first lecturer from Department of PSPA
as "Int. Psc.1" and so on.

3.5.6 Coding of data

The next step in the analysis was to familiarise myself with the data. I did this by carefully reading
the eight transcripts of the lectures and interviews. Here I made some notes and did minor editing.
The aim was to thoroughly understand the content of the data and develop a sense of the
participants' characteristic use of language.

After I had become familiar with the data, I started coding it by labelling units of meanings within
the text and making judgements about how to block the text into manageable parts. The coding
system on which I decided was based on the overarching research question which asks "What
discourse strategies do lecturers of the University of Dar es Salaam use; how and how widely are
the various strategies used?" I coded the data on discourse strategies at two major levels, namely
structural discourse strategies and propositional discourse strategies. In the following section, I
further clarify these kinds of strategies.

3.5.6.1 Propositional discourse strategies

Propositional discourse strategies for analysis refer to instances of questioning, repetition and code
switching. These three categories provided discrete information for a straightforward analysis. In
short, the three selected themes are ones that occurred frequently and could relatively be easily
identified through the coding of transcriptions. Thus, at this stage, I only identified those elements
within the transcripts that were relevant to my research questions. Furthermore, I revised the themes
and recoded several times to capture things I might not have noticed in the first coding.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

86

3.5.6.2 Structural discourse strategies

The structural discourse strategies that seemed to be most evident in transfer of information and
development of knowledge, and which are given special attention in the analysis, are discourse
markers (DMs) and pronouns. Researchers have approached the study of DMs from different
perspectives. They have referred to them as Cohesive Markers (Halliday & Hassan, 1976),
Discourse Markers (Shiffrin, 1987; Traugott, 1995), Gambits (DuFon, 1995) or Pragmatic Markers
(Frazer, 1990; Andersen, 2000; Cuenca, 2008). DMs include words such as well (Cuenca, 2008)
and like (Andersen, 2000). Sometimes they are words and phrases or even sentences that play a
crucial role in the interpretation of discourse by signalling coherent relations between discourse
units. For example, DuFon (1995:27) observes that they can be used to semantically guide the
hearer through discourse by means of phrases like the main point is … or to facilitate turn taking by
using expressions like May I interrupt for a moment? In addition, they can be used to mark a
discourse boundary by use of expressions like that is all I have to say (DuFon, 1995:27).

3.5.7 Data interpretation

According to Henning et al. (2004:107), data interpretation involves identifying ways in which
emerging themes and sub themes, connections and contradictions fit together. As for the
interpretation of the data, I identified the different ways in which the emerging themes and sub
themes related to one another across the three sets of data (lectures, interviews and field notes).
Then I compared, contrasted and discussed the themes in accordance with the research question. I
adopted skills offered by Content Analysis also termed conceptual or thematic analysis (Babbie &
Mouton, 2001). It functions to examine words or phrases in various texts such as essays, interviews,
speeches, and conversations. The examination of the presence or repetition of certain words and
phrases can help make inferences about the speaker or writer (Palmquist, 1993).

Neuman (1997:272) distinguishes between content and text by arguing that content refers to words,
meanings, pictures, symbols, ideas, themes or any message that can be communicated. A text on the
other hand, is anything visual, written or spoken that serves as a medium of communication
(Neuman, 1997:272). A specific term for content analysis in qualitative research is qualitative
content analysis (Graneheim & Lundman, 2004:106). Generally, the basic issue when performing
(qualitative) content analysis is to decide whether the analysis should focus on manifest or latent
content (Graneheim & Lundman, 2004; Babbie & Mouton, 2001). According to Graneheim and
Lundman (2004:106), two types of analysis are undertaken. The first one focuses on what the text
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

87

says thus analysing the content aspect. In so doing, the analysis describes the visible and obvious
components of text. The second one focuses on what the text talks about, dealing with the
relationship aspect and involving an interpretation of the underlying meaning of the text. Graneheim
and Lundman (2004:106) further note that both manifest and latent content deal with interpretation
but the interpretations vary in depth and level of abstraction. Therefore, I decided to interpret both
manifest and latent content of my data because I wanted to go beyond merely describing the
presence and frequency of discourse strategies used by the lecturers. I sought to gain some
understanding of how the language of classroom interaction at the University of Dar es Salaam
conveys socio-cultural knowledge into ways of thinking and acting, with an aim to further an
understanding of the complicated processes of language use in teaching and learning.

3.6 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Mason (2002:79) observes that the use of qualitative interviews in generating qualitative data raises
a number of ethical issues that require researchers' awareness and prior planning. Researchers need
to observe aspects such as what they ask questions about, how they ask the questions, the level of
freedom of the interviewees, whether and how they can guarantee confidentiality, and how they can
balance power relations between them and their interviewees (Mason, 2002:80). Therefore, I
planned my interview questions in such a way that they would not directly touch on private or
personal matters of the participants. Moreover, before starting to collect data, I sought research
clearance from the Stellenbosch University ethics committee and from the authorities of the
University of Dar es Salaam. I asked the participants to sign informed consent, assuring that they
were voluntarily participating in my research. I also clarified to the participants on how I would
maintain anonymity and confidentiality. Documents supporting the application and granting of
ethical clearance are attached in appendix A.

3.7 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

During this study, two types of limitations arose. These were environmental and methodological
limitations, as I shall explain in the following sections.

3.7.1 Environmental limitations

The first environmental limitation emanated from the general physical setting of the University of
Dar es Salaam. As explained under section earlier, there are three colleges, three schools and three
institutes all spread across the main campus. There was a sharing of classrooms across all courses
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

88

regardless of college, school or institute. For example, a Sociology lecture could take place in a
lecture room in the College of Engineering or the School of Law. Apart from that, some lecture
rooms are so close to each other that there was sound interference from the next lecture room during
the time of the recording of the audio-visual data. In the College of Engineering, the lecture room
was close to a workshop so that the noise from the drilling machines caused discomfort to both the
lecturer and students as well as to us who were recording the data. Another challenge due to
physical proximity of lecture rooms was the noise made by students gathering around the rooms
waiting for the current lecture to end so that they could enter and occupy front seats during the
following lecture. All this was because the lecture rooms are not sound proof. In some cases, due to
the long walking distance between lecture rooms, students came in late and thus disrupted the video
recording as they ran across the room searching for seats. This situation therefore, inadvertently
affected the quality of the audio-visual data, as some words were not clearly audible during data
transcription.

The second physical limitation originated from the arrangement for office allocation to members of
teaching staff of the University of Dar es Salaam. For instance, because most lecturers share offices,
it was difficult to assure privacy during the interviews. Therefore, as stated earlier, I had to invite
some of the participants to my office, which was quiet and more secluded, for conducting the
interviews.

3.7.2 Methodological limitations

The first methodological limitation to this study relates to its population and sample. The selection
of only one college to which I belong as teaching staff member may reflect some bias. The second
methodological limitation to this study relates to the sample size. Two departments and only eight
lecturers may not have been representative enough of the whole college. Thirdly, the combination of
three theoretical approaches (Conversation Analysis, Discourse Analysis and Content Analysis)
may not have been sufficiently exhaustive. For example, Conversation Analysis requires
transcription standards, which did not fully suit the nature of data at hand. Moreover, Discourse
Analysis that aims at addressing how institutional power relations are both reproduced and
contested (Terre-blanche & Durrheim, 1999:159) was not used in that sense in this study. Fourthly,
although during observation of the lectures, many non-linguistic features of the lecturers, such as
facial expressions, hand and body movement were noticed, many of them did not tally well as
discourse strategies. In that case, in the analysis I eventually attended to only one (use of the black
or white board). This decision may have caused the missing of some essential aspects of the data.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

89

Nonetheless, in the scope of this project it was not possible to attend to all noted features of the
discourses. As will be indicated in the analysis, the selected features were considered and chosen for
their frequency and distribution across all the observed lectures.

Lastly, although there was a prior meeting with the lecturers and students were briefed in advance
on my presence in the lecture rooms during the lectures, the effect of the use of the video and the
presence of the research assistant who was recording the lectures can by no means be ignored. This
might have made the lecturers behave cautiously and thus not freely engage with students, as they
would have without our presence.

3.8 SUMMARY

In this chapter, I have introduced the concepts, research paradigm and research design used in this
study. I particularly explicated their meaning, types and functions as well as their relevance to the
present study. I also dwelt on the selection of population, sampling and sampling procedures as well
as on the issues of data collection, processing, coding, analysis and interpretation. I provided the
profile of each participant and reported about the ethical considerations I also observed the kinds of
limitations that I encountered during the execution of the study. In chapter four, I will present a full
and detailed analysis of the data.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

90

Chapter Four

ANALYSIS OF DISCOURSE
STRATEGIES IN LECTURES

4.1 INTRODUCTION

In this chapter I present an analysis of the data collected in this research project in accordance with
the study's aim that was presented in chapter one (cf. 1.3.1) of this dissertation. That aim,
specifically, was to identify the discourse strategies that lecturers of the University of Dar es Salaam
use during classroom interaction, with a view to disclosing possible generic patterns as they occur in
lectures delivered by bilingual lecturers4 to multilingual students in tertiary education. Accordingly,
four fundamental objectives guided the study (cf. 1.3.2). The first one was to identify and describe
discourse strategies used by lecturers at the University of Dar es Salaam during classroom
interaction. The second one was to describe how and how widely the lecturers use the various
strategies during classroom interaction to map them into an occurrence pattern that can function as
reference, indicating which strategies occur systematically in classroom interaction in a multilingual
educational setting. The third one was to establish why the lecturers use the observed as well as
other discourse strategies during classroom interaction with students. The fourth one was to evaluate
the use of the most prominent strategies used in lectures in terms of their likely functionality in
facilitating learning among multilingual students studying through an L2 (or L3). These objectives
were rephrased into a set of research questions that guided the data collection and have been used in
directing the analysis, which is to be presented in sections 4.2 and 4.3

The findings presented and analysed in this section refer to what have been identified in chapter two
as propositional discourse strategies (cf. 2.2.5). They will demonstrate and explain how lecturers in
a multilingual educational setting such as at the University of Dar es Salaam, utilise linguistic
resources such as repetition, questioning and code switching available to them to facilitate
classroom interaction. Therefore, the analysis given in this section will attend to generic features of
the lectures, and specifically to the discursive contributions of the lecturers.

4
Most lecturers know more than two languages (i.e. at least their mother tongue, Kiswahili and English); thus, the term
bilingual is used here as equivalent to multilingual, and it indicates specifically a form of multilingualism that is not
merely the combination of two or three monolingual structures. See discussion elsewhere in section 2.5.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

91

As noted earlier, there were two sources of data, eight lectures and eight interviews with the
lecturers. Both sets of data were recorded and transcribed. The transcripts of the lecture data were
carefully scrutinised in order to recognise regularly recurring propositional discourse strategies.
Using NviVO, the transcripts were coded to recognise all instances of the marked propositional
discourse strategies. The outcomes of this process justified a classification of the propositional
discourse strategies that occur regularly as marked forms in the discourse and that function not only
as cohesive devices, but also as pedagogical instruments. Structural discourse strategies identified in
the same way in chapter two (cf. 2.2.5) will be analysed in section 4.3. The data is analysed in
relation to question one, that is, to identify and describe the discourse strategies that lecturers use
during classroom interaction. In section 4.1.4 the data is analysed in relation to question two, that is,
to describe how widely the various strategies are used. Moreover, in section 4.1.5 the data is
analysed in relation to question three, that is, to analyse the reports of the lecturers on their use of
those strategies. Section 4.4 contains the summary of the chapter.

The interview data helped to supplement and check the empirical data obtained in the lectures. They
particularly provided information about lecturer's classroom experience as far as English as LoI is
concerned, about discourse strategies that lecturers consciously use to facilitate the learning
experience of students in lectures, about the reasons for their use of some generic strategies, and
about their view on the usefulness of the strategies they use. Only interview data on why the
lecturers use the observed strategies is analysed because the interview followed the lectures and
focused on specific strategies that appeared most notable in the lecture transcripts.

As mentioned above, both the lecture and interview data were uploaded into qualitative data
analysis software (NviVo) and were coded in accordance with the categories recognised as relevant.
Propositional discourse strategies, which are analysed in this chapter, were queried according to
how they occurred as sentences, paragraphs or ideas. The results for sets of data in this relatively
small closed corpus are presented in Table 4.1.

As stated in chapter one most studies conducted on the language of classroom interaction in
Tanzania (cf. Mwinsheikhe, 2009; Rubagumya 2008; Qorro, 2006) focus on the linguistic
competence of teachers and students in primary and secondary schools. They then attempt to
associate any linguistic problems facing teachers and students with language policy and language
planning practices in the country. In contrast, this study considers the communicative and discursive
organisation of lectures from a different angle by studying the language of classroom interaction at
tertiary level, particularly at a university where the LoI is an L2 to most speakers.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

92

Although this study discusses classroom practices such as repetition, questioning and code
switching, similar to the other studies mentioned (cf. Mwinsheikhe, 2009; Rubagumya, 2008), it
does not attempt to make any evaluation in terms of competence and language policy. It also does
not aim to assess the linguistic competence of either lecturers or students. Moreover, the results
discussed do not involve language usage by students. The conversation analysis approach that is
adopted as a point of departure avoids imposing the analyst's intuitions on the data and thus does not
start out with comment on what makes an interaction good or bad. It allows the use of CA
instruments to focus on the character of classroom talk as talk in general and not a priori as
pedagogical discourse (Dalton-Puffer, 2007:37). Nevertheless, in chapter 6, when a summary of the
findings are given, pertinent aspects of the discursive structure will be related to the generic
functions of academic discourses as these were introduced in chapter 2, and some evaluative
remarks will be given.

Lectures make out one type of discourse genres. Such genres, according to Leftein and Snell
(2011:41), are relatively stable ways of using language resulting from recurring situations in
different areas of social activity. Discourse genres serve both as resource for fashioning utterances
and laying constraints upon the way those utterances are to be understood and judged by others.
They encompass a range of social and semiotic dimensions, among others those of thematic content,
compositional structure, styles, lexical items, interactional roles and norms, interpersonal relations
and evaluative frames (Leftein & Snell, 2011:41).

Moreover, due to the nature of the participants (university lecturers) and the style of teaching large
groups in timetabled formal lectures (monologue), the data significantly differs from that of many
studies on the language of classroom interaction. For instance, the inherently long stretches of
monologue data do not readily allow for sequences such as what Mehan (1979) describes as
Initiation Response Evaluation (IRE) pattern. When the lecturer seems to initiate such a sequence, it
is mainly done to fulfil a social function and not to form an active part in communicative knowledge
construction, as it would be in lower levels of education. Table 4.1 summarises the propositional
discourse strategies that occurred most significantly in the eight lectures.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

93

Table 4.1: Results on the use of Propositional Discourse Strategies by lecturers

LPSc. LSoc. T
Strategy 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Cl. 39 4 21 14 14 11 44 13 160
Rptn. Phr. 29 8 15 30 12 14 17 10 135
G/total 295
Tag 4 3 10 15 15 4 10 3 64
Qn. Rhet. 12 10 1 4 5 5 - - 37
Clos. 2 4 4 5 4 5 6 3 33
Open 2 4 1 6 8 7 1 1 30
G/total 164
C/S Int/sent. 8 1 1 - - 15 4 1 30
Intr/sent. 17 4 4 1 20 21 2 1 70
G/total 100

Table 4.1 indicates that in all the eight lecture hours with an average duration of fifty minutes each,
added up to four hundred minutes, repetition was the most frequent propositional discourse strategy
used by the lecturers, with 295 instances. Statistically this means that in every 1.36 minutes there
was one instance of repetition. The data further shows that questioning was the second most used
propositional discourse strategy among lecturers, with 164 instances. Statistically this means that
there was one instance of teacher questioning every 2.44 minutes. The third propositional discourse
strategy in the list was teacher code switching, with 100 instances meaning that there was one
instance of lecturer code switching every 4 minutes. Thus, lecturers appear generically to use
repetition more than any other strategy. Further discussion of the frequently used strategies and the
implications of such usage, will be provided in sections 4.2.1 - 4.2.6.

4.2 PROPOSITIONAL DISCOURSE STRATEGIES

As explained in chapter two (cf. 2.2.5) there are a variety of aspects of conversation and discourse
that have been investigated within the fields of Conversation Analysis, Discourse Analysis and
Genre Studies. The data of this study indicated that not all of the general units of conversation or of
discourse would be pertinent to or theoretically interesting to this analysis. Therefore, the division
here has been selected in a considered way: first, the three most widely occurring propositional
discourse strategies will be analysed as they were used in the lectures; second, the insight gained
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

94

from interviews with the lecturers will be presented. Attention will go to their comment on, and in
some cases justification of, the various discourse strategies they used.

4.2.1 Exemplifying repetition in lectures

As has been indicated above, of the three highly marked propositional discourse strategies,
repetition was the most frequently used. Out of those occurrences, 160 (54%) instances were clausal
repetitions, while 135 (45%) instances were phrasal repetitions. In this section, discussion focuses
on repetition generally, with an exposition also of the two separate types of repetition, distinguished
in terms of their syntactic form. I provide a brief theoretical overview of the functions of repetition
as well. The occurrence patterns of the particular discourse strategy will be related to lecturers'
interview comment on such generic uses.

As noted earlier in chapter two, literature on discourse analysis gives a number of different ways of
distinguishing between various types of repetition. Three major such types are 'self repetition', by
which the speaker repeats whole or part of his or her own previous discourse (cf. Allwood et al.,
1990; Leftein & Snell, 2011), 'other repetition', by which the speaker repeats whole or part of the
respondent's discourse (cf. Knutson, 2010). The third is 'resumptive repetition', by which the speaker
resumes to a previous discourse after some sort of discourse digression (cf. Quick, 2007). In this
study, the lecturers were found to use all three of these types. Although 'self-repetition' is the most
frequently occurring type of repetition, there are also a significant number of uses of 'other
repetition' and of 'resumptive repetition'. The analysis here does not focus on these three types
specifically. It considers repetition at two formal levels distinguished, namely phrasal and clausal
repetition (cf. Table 4.1).

With regard to function, Tannen (1989:47ff) regards repetition as an unmarked communicative


behaviour, thus as a naturally occurring linguistic strategy that is used generically. Such a strategy
enables speakers to communicate smoothly and at the same time reduces the load of information
listeners have to process. Concerning teacher repetition, Viaño and Conejos, (1996:129) emphasise
that repetition in classroom interaction is just as functional and communicative as it is in other less
structured kinds of discourse. They further note that teachers repeat themselves in order to increase
the amount of input especially when giving information and correcting (Viaño & Conejos,
1996:133). Moreover, Knutson (2010:15) finds that repetition has a massive contribution to a
successful interaction. Viaño and Conejos, (1996:134) present a list of the functions of teacher
repetition. According to them, teacher repetition functions to achieve cohesion, to perform self-
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

95

repair, to fill gaps, to emphasise a point, to provide and ask for information, and to facilitate turn
taking. Quick (2007:1) similarly considering the functions of repetition, just collapses all the
separately identified functions of repetition into two main actions, namely as ones serving to give
prominence and achieve

The following excerpts give examples of various kinds of repetition that were evident in the data. As
indicated in table 4.1, the lecturers used repetition often and generically. Three examples that
illustrate how repetition5 is used in typical functions, that are to mark emphasis (excerpt 1), topic
focusing (excerpt 2) and clarification of ideas and creating cohesion across a longer stretch of one
turn (excerpt 3) are provided here. Further examples for other functions of repetition will be
provided in more detailed discussion in section 4.2.2. In section 2.4.6.2 the occurrence patterns of
the particular discourse strategy will be related to lecturers' interview comment on such generic
uses.

(1)
1 He dared to declare to the council that ... these are the words which he said; he
2 said: We white people have not come to this country … we have not come to
3 this country to raise the native … to raise the native to the scale of
4 civilisation … this man declared himself … the white man declared himself ... the white
man declared himself that his aim was not to civilise …
LPsc.1

In excerpt (1), the lecturer seems mechanically to repeat the underlined expressions. Nevertheless,
essentially the repetition has a goal to emphasise certain content, namely, what the white man said
(at the meeting of the Legislative Council). The lecturer gives the background to the topic and
throughout the rest of the utterance; the emphasis is on what the white man said at the meeting with
regard to his relationship with the natives. Moreover, the lecturer introduces the emotive verb
'declare' in (line 1) then changes to a neutral one 'said' in (line 1-2). Thereafter she starts quoting
what the white man said in (line 3) before going back to the emotive verb 'declare' (line 4-5) and
makes clear the point of emphasis that the white people's intention was 'not to civilise'. Through
such kind of repetition, the lecturer puts prominence to the topic thus performing the discourse
function of emphasising. Additionally, the lecturer accomplishes cohesion and thus topic continuity
through the repetition of the expression 'he said' (line 1-2) and the expression 'the white man

5
In the excerpts, due to the need to select and illustrate clearly, only pertinent parts of a longer unit have been given. The
convention [xxx … xxx] will be used to indicate the omission of some text. The full text is available in the recordings and
in the transcripts, which are given as an addendum in CD-format.
Regarding excerpt conventions, in this section on repetition the phrases that are repeated, either word-for-word, or in a
rephrasing of the same concept, will be underlined.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

96

declared himself' (line 4-5). Excerpt (2) shows how lecturers use repetition to focus students to a
topic.

(2)
1 … we will look at Max Weber on Religion … and today we want to broaden
2 that spectrum … to understand … the role of religion in the development
3 of Western capitalism. So, that is our topic today. We are broadening from
4 last lectures … Weber was able to explain that religion was one of the factors
5 that led to development … of Western capitalism … . So, that is our topic today.
LSoc.3

In excerpt (2), the lecturer uses repetition to establish connection to the work of the previous
lectures. He introduces the topic and then draws attention of the students toward the topic of the day
by referring to something that was discussed in the previous meetings and shows that they are going
to broaden on it (line 1). That way the lecturer gives information about how the topic is going to be
handled in relation to the topics introduced in the previous lectures. This functions as an important
focusing device as makes students aware in advance of what to expect in the current lecture. Thus,
through repetition the lecturer does not only attain cohesion by the use of the anaphoric reference
marker 'that' in (line 3 and 5) but also uses the strategy to focus the students by clarifying how the
current topic relates to the previous. Excerpt (3) shows how lecturers use repetition to clarify a point
or process.

(3)
1 We are dealing with the concept of social identity … the concept of social
2 identity in the process for growing up … the process of growing up is
3 considered … it is considered as a process of enculturation … some view
4 this process of enculturation as more passive …
LSoc.4

Excerpt (3) also illustrates how the lecturer uses repetition to clarify a point and create cohesion and
topic continuity across a long stretch of speech. He introduces the phrase 'the concept of social
identity' (line 1). Then he situates it in the context of 'the process of growing up' (line 3). He further
defines it in the context of the process of growing up 'it is considered as a process of enculturation'
(line 3). Finally he concludes how some people view the process of enculturation '… a passive
process' (line 4). By means of repetition, the lecturer provides a smooth link between different ideas
and concludes a topic logically instead of just mentioning isolated points. With this background
about the lecturers' use of repetition, section 4.2.2 presents a clarification of the types and further
functions of repetition that transpired in the data.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

97

4.2.2 Categorising repetition in lectures

As noted in table 4.1, there were two major prominent types of repetition in the data namely clausal
and phrasal. A scrutiny shows that for both types the repetition served three major functions. These
were to reiterate the speakers own discourse 'self-repetition' (cf. Allwood et al., 1990), to resume a
previous topic after a digression, interruption or some other interlude that is 'resumptive repetition'
(cf. Quick, 2007) or to revoice respondent's discourse so as to expand a dialogue that is 'other
repetition' (cf. Knutson, 2012). Nevertheless, the analysis provided here works with the established
order of classification namely clausal versus phrasal repetition.

4.2.2.1 Clausal Repetition

As the term itself suggests, a clausal repetition involves the repetition of a whole clause. The
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (2005) technically defines a clause as a group of
words that contains a subject and a verb, but which is usually only part of a sentence. There is a
distinction between independent clauses such as 'she went home' and dependent clauses such as
'because she was tired' in the sentence 'She went home because she was tired'. They differ because
an independent clause can be a sentence by itself thus can convey a complete idea, while an
independent clause cannot. Considering the major function identified for repetition as a rhetorical
device, namely to emphasize a point and continue a topic, thus to achieve prominence and cohesion
(Quick, 2007:1), in clausal repetition the emphasis is on the whole clause not on isolated words.
Biber (2006:4) finds that typically class lectures are oral texts made up of a series of relatively short
independent and dependent clauses. Excerpt (4) demonstrates the repetition of independent clauses.
Table 4.1 indicates that there were 160 instances of clausal repetition in the eight lectures.
Statistically this means that in the 400 minutes of lecture time there was one instance of clausal
repetition every 2.5 minutes.

(4)
1 Thomas Hofs is praised … his political thinking is praised for logical clarity of
2 arguments … he is praised for producing logical clarity of arguments … when he was
3 talking about his concept on the law, natural law … he is credited for understanding
4 that no justice without law …
PSc.3

Excerpt (4) shows how a lecturer repeats independent clauses for cohesive and prominence
purposes. The strategy also gives the lecturer a variety of means to expand the topic as such by
means of repair 'Thomas Hofs is praised' … 'His political thinking is praised' (line 1) and 'he is
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

98

praised for logical clarity … he is praised for producing logical clarity of arguments' (line 2) and the
expression 'he is credited for understanding that no justice without law' (line 4-5). Allwood et al.
(1990:1) observe that classroom practices such as the repetition and change of already formulated
content or expressions functionally assists an individual in managing his or her memory as well as
articulating a point. Specifically the repetition of the clauses by the lecturer here enables him in the
task of what Biber (2006:72) calls 'elaborating information'. Excerpt (5) illustrates how lecturers use
repetition of dependent clauses.

(5)
1 Whereas power, whereas power is the ability to influence the behaviour,
2 whereas power is the ability to influence the behaviour of others, whereas
3 power is the ability to influence the behaviour of others, authority is the right
4 to do so, authority is the right to do so.
LPsc.4

Excerpt (5) illustrates how the lecturer uses repetition of dependent clauses strategically. First, he
draws students' attention creating suspense through repetition of the dependent clause 'whereas
power' and then removes the suspense by introducing the independent clause (line 1). In line 2 the
lecturer elaborates the point of the meaning of power by extending the clause (line 2) by addition of
the words '… of others'. He repeats the modified clause (line 2-3) before he introduces the contrast
between the concepts 'power' and 'authority' (line 3), which he repeats with emphasis (line 4). When
examining the language of university registers, Biber (2006:72) finds that although dependent
clauses are linguistically complex thus associated more with written than with spoken English, in
university registers they are more common in spoken than in written registers. This repetition
pattern as Viaño and Conejos (1996:133) argue increases the amount of input while mitigating for
comprehension problems. In line (1-3) the lecturer makes an important distinction between the two
concepts: he selects the parts to introduce first in order to capture students' attention, then he repeats
the parts still with some suspense, until he concludes by introducing the distinction in the second
part (line 3) and repeats it plainly (line 4). This helps the lecturer, as Johnstone (1994:7) suggests,
using repetition to emphasise the distinction between 'power' and 'authority', thereby emphasising
the need for students to grasp this distinction.

4.2.2.2 Phrasal Repetition

The Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (2005) technically defines a phrase as a group
of words, especially when they are used to form part of a sentence, such as 'walking along the road'
and 'a bar of soap'. As opposed to clausal repetition, in phrasal repetition the emphasis is on the
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

99

phrase. The most frequently used phrases in this study were noun and verb phrases. Biber (2006:47)
reports that in spoken university registers noun and verb phrases are used with equal regularity.
Excerpt (6) illustrates the lecturers' use of noun phrases.

(6)
1 We are dealing with the concept of social identity… the concept of social
2 identity in the process of growing up … the process of growing up is
3 considered … it is considered as a process of enculturation …
4 some view this process of enculturation as more passive …
LSoc.4

Excerpt (6) illustrates how a lecturer uses repetition of noun phrases to clarify and expand a point.
The lecturer introduces the phrase 'the concept of social identity' (line 1). Then he situates it in the
context 'in the process of growing up' (line 2). He further defines it in the context of the process of
growing up 'it is considered as a process of enculturation' (line 3). Finally, he concludes how some
people view the process of enculturation 'as a passive process' (line 4). This excerpt demonstrates
how the lecturer makes use of nouns to provide a smooth link between different ideas and conclude
a topic instead of just mentioning isolated words. Biber (2006:55) finds that in academic discourse
much of the referential academic information is packaged in noun phrases. Excerpt (7) illustrates
how lecturers repeat verb phrases to emphasise activity.

(7)
1 We will look at Max Weber on Religion … and today we want to broaden
2 that spectrum … to understand … the role of religion in the development of
3 Western capitalism. So, that is our topic today. We are broadening from
4 Last lectures Weber was able to explain that religion was one of the factors
5 that led to development … of Western capitalism. So, that is our topic today.
LSoc.3

In excerpt (7) the lecturer introduces the topic and then draws attention of the students toward the
topic of the day by referring to something that was discussed in the previous meetings and shows
that they are going to expand on it (line 1). Then, by means of repetition of the verb 'broaden', the
lecturer gives information about how the topic is going to be handled in relation to the previous
lectures. As noted earlier, this functions as an important focusing device. It makes students aware of
what to expect in the current lecture in advance. Thus, through repetition of the verb phrase the
lecturer does not only attain cohesion by the use of the anaphoric reference marker 'that' in (line 3
and 5) but also uses the strategy to focus the students by clarifying how the current topic relates to
the previous.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

100

4.2.3 Exemplifying use of questions in lectures

Table 4.1 indicates that the second most frequent propositional discourse strategy was the use of
questions. In this section, discussion focuses on questioning generally, with an elucidation also of
three separate types of questioning. I provide a brief theoretical overview on the functions of
questioning as well. In section 2.4.6.3, the occurrence patterns of the particular discourse strategy
will be related to lecturers' interview comment on such generic uses.

As noted earlier in chapter two (cf. 2.2.5), literature on classroom interaction indicates that there are
two major types of questions, namely display and referential questions (Mehan, 1979). Another
popular binary division of questions is the open versus closed question types (Barnes, 1967).
Dalton-Puffer (2007:96-97) clarifies that whereas the possible answers for closed ended questions
are limited to a simple one word answer thus making them quick and easy to answer, open ended
questions allow a more extensive answer and are more demanding on the part of the respondent.
Dalton-Puffer (2007:97) further observes that closed ended questions relate more with yes/ no,
true/false distinctions as is required in multiple choice answer. Open-ended questions on the other
hand typically begin with wh-words. However, she notes the difficulty in attempting to establish a
clear-cut formal demarcation between closed and open-ended questions (Dalton-Puffer, 2007:97).

Athanasiadou (1990) expands this division of classroom question types into four namely
information questions, rhetorical questions, examination questions and indirect request questions.
As noted earlier, most literature on questioning as a discourse strategy is not about classroom
interaction in tertiary education (cf. Mwinsheikhe, 2009; Rubagumya, 2008; Dalton-Puffer, 2007).
Considering the difference between large university lectures and interactive primary or secondary
level classrooms, the data in such studies cannot be compared to the occurrence patterns of
questioning at a university level. Teaching in large lectures does not follow the dialogic teaching,
style the frequent occurrence patterns observed from the actual uses of questions functionally
analysed for primary and secondary school classrooms, may not fit in the various questioning
models that have been developed in educational discourse analysis. Therefore, this analysis follows
the traditional typology of questions namely open versus closed ended questions, rhetorical and tag
questions, although practically the sequencing in the presentation begins with the most frequent, and
ends with the least frequent type of questions as occurred in the data.

The data shows that lecturers ask fewer questions than they repeat the content (cf. statistics for
repetition in section 4.2.1). These results indicate the peculiarity of a lecture as a monologue, which
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

101

inhibits active communicative interaction between speakers and hearers. According to Tsui
(1995:25), teacher questioning plays a special role by boosting classroom interaction by stimulating
students to engage with the content elements. In large group lectures, however, active listener
participation is not easy as there are too many hearers to allow meaningful reciprocal conversational
interaction. Then the uninvited participation of a hearer is often taken to be more disruptive than
constructive. Thus, some lecturers admit to the aim of delivering a lecture without or with minimal
interruption (cf. 4.2.6 below). This may explain the slightly more limited use of questions by the
lecturers in this study. To be specific, the classes were very large, with more than 200 students in
each. In addition, the lecture halls were so large that it would be impossible to involve any
significant numbers of students through questions. Without the aid of desk microphones participants
would barely be able to hear one another, let alone being able to interact.

Literature on language use during classroom interaction indicates that teachers' use of questions
generally facilitates engagement of learners in the instructional interaction and helps check
comprehension of complex concepts by students (cf. McCormick & Donato, 2000:183). Essentially,
questioning is taken to form a key element to the development of understanding (Harvey &
Goudvis, 2000:81). Dalton-Puffer (2007:93) conceptualises questioning at individual and
educational levels. At individual level, questioning satisfies an individual's passion to know
something while at an educational level it helps synchronise the knowledge needs of large groups of
people, thus making students aware of previous challenges in the community of practice and of
answers that previous generations arrived at.

For Athanasiadou (1990:108) the motivation to ask an information question stems from the
speaker's desire for knowledge of something with which he or she is unfamiliar. The assumption is
that the response provided contains such new information. As for the purpose of teacher
questioning, the British Council (2006) summarises them into three kinds. Those are asking students
to remember something they already know and to give a correct answer, asking them to consider a
problem or analyse something to demonstrate their skill in knowledge application, and asking
students about their behaviour and managing the classroom such as in 'What are you doing?' 'Why
are you late?'

The following examples illustrate how lectures used questioning strategy to check students' memory
(excerpt 8), to challenge students to ponder on a certain issue (excerpt 9) and to manage students'
behaviour (excerpt 10).
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

102

(8)
1 I know that most of you went through classes of History so you know some of the factors
2 that Marx says had been important in the development of capitalism. Who can mention to
3 me some of the factors that Marx and other neo-Marxists said they were leading into
4 development of capitalism? What are some of those factors? Who can tell us some of
5 those factors? What are some of those factors that led to development of capitalism
6 according to Marx? Who went-went through History classes? … Some of the factors? …
LSoc.3

In excerpt (8), the lecturer uses this kind of questioning strategy to solicit information from students
that can lead to the development of the content. The questioning sequence begins by posing a frame
from which students have to draw information in order to answer the subsequent questions (lines 1-
2) '… most of you went through History classes'. Then from part of line 2 through line 6, the
lecturer stimulates the students' engagement in the discussion by consistently framing the context in
which they should draw from. This practice allows the lecturer to, as Athanasiadou (1990:110)
argues; pin down the students thus obliging them to provide the answer. Excerpt (9) illustrates how
lecturers use questioning for arousing interest and curiosity.

(9)
1 what it means you replace one species which is European or white with another species
2 which is African or by that time called black. Who is going to do that? Should we say God
3 is going to come from heaven and replace? Is that going to be done in a single day? or you
4 come to the people and say you have to go away? ... it was not possible …
LPsc.1

Excerpt (9) illustrates how a lecturer uses questions to stimulate students' critical thinking. The
lecturer begins by clarifying the meaning of decolonisation process (lines 1 and 2). Then the lecturer
challenges the students by asking them a string of questions in relation to how complex the
decolonisation process was (line 2-4). This kind of usage of questioning strategy by the lecturer
functions, as Athanasiadou (1990:109) suggests, emphasising the point about the complication
associated with the attempt to replace one regime with another. Contrary to the canonically assigned
function of questioning of indicating that the speaker lacks or is uncertain of some information (cf.
Heritage, 2007:2), in the excerpt the lecturer does not seem to expect any specific response from the
students rather uses questioning strategy to indicate what Bolden and Robinson (2011:94) refer to as
a challenging stance. This is demonstrated by the lecturer's concluding remark, '… it was not
possible …' (line 4). Considering the fact that this was a Political Science lecture on the issue of
decolonisation, this usage aimed at challenging and promoting students' higher-level thinking.
Brown and Wragg (1993:4) regard such usage of question very useful in arousing interest and
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

103

curiosity in the topic while emphasising it. Excerpt (10) illustrates how lecturers use questioning for
class management and engagement with students.

(10)
1 Are we proceeding accordingly? Through this particular phenomena of what we
2 Call law … tuendelee waheshimiwa? [ Should we continue?] Any query … any
3 question? So I cannot understand what exactly … should I repeat the subject matter?
4 Should I clarify? The purpose of reselling is "ni kupata [is to get] more
5 than five shillings, si ndiyo? [Isn't it?]'. I am not dealing with that particular
6 type of conceptualization ... Sawa? [Ok?]
LSoc. 2

Excerpt (10) indicates how a lecturer uses questioning for class management and engagement with
students. The lecturer discovers that students are not grasping the topic (through their gaze) and
wants to know what is going wrong in (line 1). He introduces an idea but still students seem not to
follow. Then he asks in Kiswahili if they can continue in (line 2). In line (3-6), the lecturer tries to
gain control of the class and asks if he should clarify. All along, the lecturer asks solidarity check
questions such as 'Isn't it? and Ok?, so as to check and manage students behaviours thus gain control
of the class (cf. British Council, 2006).

4.2.4 Categorising use of questions in lectures

As has been mentioned earlier the analysis of lecturers' use of questions that follows here is in
accordance with the order in which they occurred in the eight lectures. The order begins with tag
questions followed by rhetorical questions, closed ended questions and lastly open ended questions.

Table 4.1 shows that out of the 164 instances of questioning, 64 (39%) were of tag questions
followed by rhetorical questions 37 (22%), closed ended questions 33 (20%) and lastly open ended
questions 30 (18%) instances. In addition, the statistics show that for the entire 400 minutes of
lecture time, questions occurred in the following sequence: tag question (after every 6.25 minutes),
rhetorical question (after every 1.810 minutes), closed question (after every 1.121 minutes) and
open question (after every 1.133 minutes). In the literature on teacher classroom discourse, it is
argued that teacher questioning dominates (cf. Wood, 1998:175) thereby forming one of the most
central elements of that discourse type (cf. Tsui, 1995:23). The following sections discuss the
question types that were used in the lectures in the order presented above.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

104

4.2.4.1 Tag questions

Literature on discourse functions of questions indicates that tag questions facilitate involvement in a
talk by asserting a point and inviting a hearer to contribute to it (Quirk et al., 1985:811) thereby
talking and then inviting participation in the form of agreement or disagreement (Holmes, 1995:86).
More comprehensively, Tottie and Hoffman (2006) describe the functions of tag questions to
include asking for information, asking for confirmation from the hearer, emphasizing a speaker's
point and challenging a statement. Linguistic investigation of this form of questioning has indicated
different types of tag questions. For example, Tottie and Hoffman (2009:31) distinguish between
canonical tag questions and invariant tag questions. A canonical tag question takes the following
form 'Makes you really think, doesn't it? While an invariant tag question has a form like: 'And you
suffer from mild asthma, is that right?' (Kim & Ann, 2008:3). These two examples differ in that in
the former the expected 'yes/no' answer is triggered by the use of an auxiliary verb, while in the
latter the trigger is an interrogative sentence. Additionally, the canonical tag question mostly invites
agreement from the hearer, while the invariant tag question indicates uncertainty and invites
confirmation from the hearer. The analysis in this section does not focus on types of tag questions
rather it confines itself to the potential functions of tag questions in the data. As noted above, there
was one instance of the use of tag question after every 6.25 minutes. Apart from memory check,
stimulation and class management functions of the tag questions used by lecturers (cf. 4.2.2), the
lecturers also used tag questions to promote interaction (excerpt 11), to encourage students to
communicate (excerpt 12) and to build closer connection with students (excerpt 13)

(11)
1 we've been talking about Karl Marx, isn't it? … we come from, most of
2 you from … from … rural areas, isn't it? ... spears … for hunting … Isn't it?
3 Thanks to "Pinda mtoto wa mkulima" [Pinda a kid of a farmer] isn't
4 it? … You remember when we were talking about alienation, isn't it?
LSoc.1

Excerpt (11) indicates how the lecturer uses tag questions to involve students in a conversation
about a previous topic in (line 1) then asks them to mention some of the tools of labour that they
know from their experience in the rural areas. He revoices the students answer 'spears' (line 2). Then
he mentions one of the uses of spears namely 'hunting' (line 2). He further mentions the name of the
Prime Minister of Tanzania referring to his humbleness a son of a peasant (line 3). This relating new
content to the context that students know by use of tag questions brings the students into the new
topic. Finally, the lecturer reminds students of a different related topic "You remember when we
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

105

were talking about … Isn't it?' thereby directing students to relate what they had discussed in
previous lectures to the current topic. This usage of tag questions facilitates what Kim and Ann
(2008:2) refer to as stimulation of engagement in the discussion as well as challenging hearer's
memory. In this case, the lecturer does three things identified by Athanasiadou (1990:110), namely
pinning down responsibility, testing and controlling. Excerpt (12) illustrates how a lecturer uses tag
questions to build closer connection with students.

(12)
1 If … ask how many people in this class are selfish, no one is going to raise their hands,
2 uwongo?' [Is it a lie?] Who is selfish? Who is nasty? Who is egoistic? but we know deep
3 inside that it's how we are. Eeh? [Isn't' it?] Elections are over? Bado? [Not yet?].
4 And what is the fate of our friend? He won? Or you are still in the … bado mnachakachua?
5 [or you are still adulterating the results?]. Ameshinda? [Has he won?] … bado? [Not
6 yet?] … he is about to win? Eeh? [Isn't' it?]
LPSc. 3

Excerpt (12) is another instance where a lecturer uses real a context familiar to the students to
develop or illustrate the relevance of a lesser-known topic. This lecture was delivered during the
time students were holding elections of their leaders. The candidate for the presidency of the Dar es
Salaam University Students Organisation (DARUSO) was from the same class. The lecturer was
talking about human beings being naturally egoistic. Therefore, he decided to concretise the
meaning of the concepts by inquiring about the fate of the student who was contesting for the
presidency in (lines 4 and 5). Remarkably, the question that illustrated his point most was the closed
ended one he asked in Kiswahili using the underlined word (line 4). 'Or you are still in the … 'bado
mnachakachua?' followed by an invariant tag question that required students to confirm if the
candidate was about to win the election given that they had tempered with the results (line 6). This
term 'chakachua' [adulterate] made newspaper headlines after the 2010 multiparty elections in
Tanzania, when most people thought their results had been tampered with, or in technical terms,
'adulterated'.

4.2.4.2 Rhetorical questions

Unlike tag questions that stimulate engagement of the listener in a talk, the major characteristic of
rhetorical questions is that the speaker does not require the hearer to provide a response. The speaker
has the answer already and may provide it (Athanasiadou, 1990:109). In excerpt (13), the lecturer
uses this questioning strategy to engage students into thinking seriously about the concept
'globalisation'.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

106

(13)
1 Because if you conceptualise the global village by taking example of your village, you
2 will find that almost all people who live in a certain village they are almost equal in
3 economic, social, and other issues. … Countries such as Japan and India, they are
4 benefiting from globalisation, but what about Tanzania? Are we benefiting as USA?
5 The question of the global village, who are the members of the global village? Do they
6 access resources equally as in your home? Because you can have just one river … Now,
7 in the global village, can you do the same? Can you get the same amount of water?
LPsc.2

The lecturer sets a frame by advising students to conceptualise the concept 'global village' from their
local knowledge of a village (line 1 and 2). She explains the real situation as is happening in the
global village by mentioning some of the countries that benefit from the global village (line 3 and
4). Then she introduces the contrastive question '… but what about Tanzania?' (line 4) and follows
with a series of questions challenging students to critically think about the membership of the
village, the equity in accessing the resources in the village. She concludes by asking the students to
compare the way they access water in the village river and the way they can access resources in the
global village. According to Athanasiadou (1990:109), this questioning strategy helps the speaker
express emotions. In excerpt (13), the Political Science lecturer expresses her attitude regarding
globalisation by means of enquiring from her students about the position of Tanzania in the global
village. By using the analogy of common-river in a village, the lecturer manages to engage students
in a higher level of thinking. Excerpt (14) illustrates the use of rhetorical question for a similar
function.

(14)
1 What it means you replace one species which is European or white with
2 another species, which is African or by that time called black. Who is going to
3 do that? Should we say God is going to come from heaven and replace? Is that
4 going to be done in a single day? Or you come to the people and say 'you have
5 to go away?' ... it was not possible …
LPsc.1

Excerpt (14), which has been generally introduced as excerpt (9) under section 4.2.3, illustrates how
a lecturer uses rhetorical questions to explain a situation and challenge students' to think critically.
The topic underway is on the concept 'decolonisation' the lecturer starts by clarifying what the
concept 'decolonisation' means, that is 'to replace one species with another' (line 1 and 2).
Thereafter, she uses rhetorical questions to emphasise how difficult the process was (lines 2-5). As
Gabrielatos (1997:7) comments, the pedagogical usefulness of this kind of questioning in not only
to challenge students but also to provide them with divergent thinking.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

107

4.2.4.3 Closed ended questions

Table 4.1 indicates that lecturers used more closed ended questions than open ended questions. It
has been observed that closed ended questions are convergent questions because they limit the
respondent to one correct answer (cf. Gabrielatos, 1997:3), thus denying a listener an opportunity to
produce more than a minimal answer, often just to give what the first speaker wants to hear (cf.
Dalton-Puffer, 2007:97). It is likely that the nature of interaction in big lectures where lecturers
control 99% of all the talk is responsible for such a form of questioning. Excerpts (15) (16) and (17)
illustrate the occurrence of closed ended questions in the data. It seems that closed ended questions
are part of what is generic to university lectures due to limited interactivity.

(15)
1 who can mention to me some of the factors that Marx and other neo-
2 Marxists said they were leading into development of capitalism? What
3 are some of those factors? Who can tell us some of those factors?
LSoc.3

Excerpt (15) illustrates how a lecturer uses closed ended questions to elicit students' answers based
on the previous lectures (line 1). Although the answers sought by the questions are short, only
referring to specific content that students know, such questioning strategy is likely to stimulate
students' attention during the delivery of a lecture on the factors that led to the development of
capitalism, which is a continuation of excerpt (2).

(16)

1 and now what is coming out and what I would like you grasp at the end of
2 this lecture is that the sovereign states … are now being eroded and are
3 Now being interfered in decision making. I think you know what
4 sovereignty of the state is. Do you still remember?
LPsc.2

Excerpt (16) illustrates how a lecturer uses a closed question to trigger a 'yes/no' answer. Dalton-
Puffer (2007) relates closed ended questions to such kind of answers while Gabrielatos (1997)
argues that such kinds of questions can easily, but not always, be answered by 'yes/no' forms.
Nevertheless, the lecturer's use of the question 'Do you still remember?' (line 4) seems to require
more than just a 'yes/no' answer from the students. In the context of the lecture, the lecturer uses the
question to challenge students' memory and relate the current topic to previous one.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

108

(17)
1 …that is actually a major contribution in sociological thinking. We ask what
2 is it? … what is it primary? Is it the idea or material condition? What ... what
3 was there first? Is like thinking of a chicken and hen and an egg. What was it
4 primary? Is it chicken or egg?
LSoc.1

Excerpt (17) indicates how a lecturer uses closed ended questioning to engage students in critical
thinking while at the same time controlling the floor. He uses a questioning strategy to lead students
into his discussion of complex concepts about idealism, using the old philosophically illustrative
question of the egg and chicken, as to what was first. This does not only stimulate students thinking
but it also brings a sense of humour thus preserving students' attention. Use of humour is listed
among the good classroom practices in lectures in that it provides interest and emotional release to
students (cf. Soliman, 1999:7).

4.2.4.4 Open ended questions

Table 4.1 indicates that across the eight lectures there were 30 instances of open ended questions
although the difference between these and closed ended questions is insignificant (only 3 instances).
Open ended questions have the potential of allowing the listener an opportunity to say more than
just producing one expected or preferred answer (Dalton-Puffer, 2007:97; Gabrielatos 1997:3) ).
Excerpt (18) illustrates some of the instances of the use of open ended questions in the data.

(18)

1 Authority is power that is cloaked or nested … They are, they seem to be magical
2 words but they are not. Authority is power cloaked or nested in legitimacy. I want to
3 introduce the concept legitimacy. Authority is power confound in legitimacy or
4 rightfulness. It is power that is embodied in legitimacy and rightfulness. What is
5 right? Authority is the right. You have the right. Where do you get that right? We
6 shall see where you will get that right from shortly.
LPSc.4

Excerpt (18) illustrates how a lecturer uses open ended question not only to allow students freedom
to provide more information on the topic but also to challenge and engage them into critical
thinking. The lecturer is explaining the concept 'authority' (line 1) but also shows how the concept
relates with the concept 'legitimacy' (line 2). The lecturer elaborates the relationship between the
two concepts (line 2-4) and introduces a stimulating question 'what is right?' (line 4-5), followed by
an emphatic question 'where do you get the right?' (line 5). Finally, he assures students that he is
going to relieve them of the burden of providing the answer to question 'we shall see where you will
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

109

get that right from shortly (line 6). This provocative use of questions is likely to hold students
attention and interest in the topic (cf. Soliman, 1999:7).

(19)
1 So, you say the idea, why? Can you explain? Why do you think the idea of having a
2 shirt was primary than … than ... than the material shirt? Can you speak up … so that
3 people can hear you at the back? So, you are … you are confusing me! He is saying
4 you can't have a shirt without having the material condition of making a shirt. Enhe?
5 Yes! What's what's yours?
LSoc.1

Excerpt (19) illustrates the only instance where the lecturer actively engages students in the
interaction through questioning. He was moving around asking specific students questions (line 1
and 2) and revoicing their answers to elicit more answers from others (line 4). Thus on this very rare
occasion the lecturer became truly interactive, through his asking of an open ended question and
selecting the person who should answer. A question and answer activity has been documented as
one of the most effective ways by which speakers achieve and negotiate their communicative goals
(cf. Bolden & Robinson, 2009:122). The lecturer sets the topic about 'what comes first between an
idea and material thing'. Students provide different answers and the lecturer continues to probe
through more questions while focusing them to the topic through revoicing (line 4). O'Connor and
Michaels (1993:318) observe that teacher re-voicing creates a shared classroom culture that
facilitates students' engagement with the relevant academic content.

4.2.5 Exemplifying code switching in lectures

Literature on language selection and use acknowledges that code switching is a common practice
used to indicate social, cultural and ethnic identities among bilinguals in bilingual communities (cf.
Shin, 2010; Foley, 1997; Myers-Scotton, 1993). Its major function is to facilitate the achievement of
interactional goals of interlocutors (cf. Shin & Milroy, 2000; Shin, 2010). Moreover, studies on this
phenomenon have been from a wide range of perspectives: formal or structural linguistic (cf. Berk-
Seligson, 1986; Poplack, 2001), psycholinguistic (cf. Taha 2009), sociolinguistic (Myers-Scotton,
1993), and from a purist perspective (cf. Grosjan, 1982) where it is seen as "contaminating" and
therefore dismissed purely as bad practice. For example, Grosjan (1982:157) regards it as an
ungrammatical language use characteristic to semi lingual speakers. Notwithstanding the stigma,
practically code switching in bilingual societies is increasingly becoming a useful communicative
strategy in expressing different functions such as those described above.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

110

The diversity in the studies on the phenomenon has resulted in a multiplicity of definitions of the
concept. For example, Swann and Sinka (2007:242) observe that the definitions of the concept vary
so much that it can also encompass switching between dialects (cf. Gumperz's, 1992 concept of
'situational code switching'). For the case of this study, code switching refers to language alternation
between English and Kiswahili by native Kiswahili speaking lecturers at the University of Dar es
Salaam. This study focuses primarily on the various functions of code switching in bilingual or
multilingual classrooms, but necessarily also attends to psycholinguistic aspects of knowing and
using two or more languages.

Literature on code switching shows a number of comparatively similar functions in different


bilingual or multilingual situations. Gumperz (1982:59) recognizes code-switching as a discourse
strategy for bilinguals. Its functions are to make quotations, to facilitate address specification, to
introduce interjections, to assist in making reiterations, to effect message qualification, and to
express involvement in the message or social and cultural group in context. Myers-Scotton
(1993:476) argues that code switching occurs at any linguistic level in the advent of negotiating
interpersonal relationships and signalling social group memberships. She further presents two major
reasons that prompt speakers' use of code switching namely to cover up a gap for a missing item in
the expected language. The second reason is the speakers' creativity in the process of negotiating a
public face. Linguistic studies on language choice and use that report the regularity of code
switching among bilingual teachers have been conducted at both lower level of education (Shin,
2010; Uys, 2010; Rose, 2006; Mwinsheikhe, 2009; Rubagumya, 2008) and higher levels of
education (cf. Taha, 2009; Li, 2008; Zabrodskaja, 2009, 2008, 2007), with comparatively similar
results.

The number of studies regarding code switching in multilingual classrooms at tertiary level in
different parts of the world is increasingly becoming large. Some of them are the study on code
switching between Arabic and English at the University of Khartoum (cf. Taha, 2009), the study on
code switching between Cantonese and English at the Hong Kong Institute of Education (Li, 2008),
and the study on code switching between Estonian and Russian at Tallinn University (Zabrodskaja,
2009, 2008, 2007). These studies show that bilingual lecturers use two languages to teach the
academic content by switching between the languages spontaneously or intentionally. Zabrodskaja
(2007:127) finds that lecturers decide when to code switch between Estonian and Russian in order
to facilitate comprehension and meaningful involvement. Taha (2009:336) reports that lecturers use
code switching between English and Arabic as both a pedagogical resource and a strategy to
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

111

achieve communicative goals such as effective classroom interaction, topic change and solidarity
with students. Li (2008:84) finds that lecturers code switch between Cantonese and English to
achieve, among other communicative goals, clarification of difficult concepts, introduction and or
consolidation of students' bilingual lexicon, and reduction of social distance with students' in order
to assist them psychologically. Although the language policy at the University of Dar es Salaam
does not officially allow the same practices as the Sudanese and Estonian context refers to, similar
practices do take place. The regularity of code switching in bilingual and multilingual context, also
in education, will be discussed below.

As noted earlier in chapter two, in this study code switching is considered in the sense of Poplack
(2001:262) as referring to the practice of bilingual or multilingual speakers of using two or more
languages in discourse, either mixing them in introducing words or shorter phrases, or switching
between the two languages with longer units of each. As noted earlier, in classroom settings,
literature on classroom practices suggests that most bilingual teachers use two languages to teach
the academic content. They switch between the languages spontaneously or intentionally (cf. Taha,
2009:336) and as explained by Zabrodskaja (2007:124), they may decide to code switch in order to
facilitate comprehension and meaningful involvement. Regarding various forms of code switching,
from a structural perspective, literature on bilingual language use refers to two main types of code
switching, namely "inter-sentential" and "intra-sentential" (cf. Poplack, 2001, 1980).

Table 4.1 shows that in the eight lectures there were 100 instances of code switching in the data. The
following examples illustrate how lecturers at the University of Dar es Salaam code switch to
resume an earlier topic or content (excerpt 20), to translate a concept (excerpt 21) and to manage the
classroom behaviour of students (excerpt 22).

(20)
1 kama nilivyokwisha kusema hapo awali {as I said earlier on} politics does not only
2 involve … does not only involve the identification as well as the specification of the
3 three institutions of the state, kama nilivyosema {as I said}, the Legislature, the
4 Judiciary and the Executive.
LSoc.2

Excerpt (20) illustrates how code switching facilitates cohesion and topic development. In this
instance, the lecturer switches to Kiswahili to make an reference to a point mentioned earlier in (line
1) and repeats it in a conclusion (line 3). This instance also shows that the lecturer puts some
emphasis on the three institutions of the state in (line 3-4). In The lecturer uses code switching to
refer to an earlier topic thus signalling topic connectivity and continuity and to facilitate emphatic
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

112

repetition. Taha (2009:342) reports a similar trend at the University of Sudan by which lecturers
code switch from English to Arabic during classroom interaction to repeat and elaborate materials
presented in English.

(21)
1 They had to, in Swahili we say kuvumilia {to tolerate}. Africans recognized
2 that the governments of Europe and America, especially Europe, had come to
3 Africa ... Because, as I told you this man who is called Leopold said that we came
4 to perpetuate ourselves yaani'tumekuja kukaa siyo kuvisit {that is, we came to
5 stay not to visit}
LPsc.1

Excerpt (21) shows how a lecturer uses code switching for translational, emphasis and cohesion
purposes. In line (1) the lecturer translates a Kiswahili concept 'kuvumilia' [to tolerate] that
expresses her feelings regarding the hardship that local community's forefathers endured under
colonialism. Then she adds a further emotional touch to it by translating an English quotation given
more than 30 minutes earlier in the same lecture in Kiswahili (line 4). This instance also functions as
a resumptive repetition in this case, functioning to focus the topic thus indicating how complex the
use of code switching in a multilingual situation is. Taha (2009:342) notes that, apart from
repetition, teacher code switching facilitates translations, elaborations and explanations of materials
presented in English.

(22)
1 When we discuss the relationship between a state and what we call the civil society …
2 are we proceeding accordingly? ... "hata dakika ishirini hazijafika watu wanaanza …
3 {Even before twenty minutes have elapsed people start …} mjitahidi,
4 tujitahidi, tujitahidi, nafikiri inaeleweka vizuri si ndiyo? {Keep up! let's keep up! let's
5 keep up!} Nafikiri inaeleweka vizuri si ndiyo? … I think it is well understood, isn't it?}
6 … I was saying that politics …
LSoc.2

In excerpt (22) a lecturer uses code switching to manage the behaviour of students when they seem
be relapsing before even twenty minutes of the lecture thus not following the lecture (line 2). The
lecturer also uses code switching to advise students to keep up for the lecture (line 2-3) while at the
same time checking if he holds his control of the class by means of confirmation questions (line 2,
4, 5). Shin (2010:111) notes that teacher code switching can function to reinforce directives,
mitigate classroom disorder resultantly emphasising the footing of a teacher as an authority.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

113

4.2.6 Categorising code switching in lectures

The assumption guiding this analysis is that code switching is not a new phenomenon among
university of Dar es Salaam lecturers although it has not received serious attention. The analysis of
lecturers' use of code switching focuses on how the classroom practice occurred in the transcription.
The label "inter-sentential code switching was assigned if code switching occurred between
sentences and the label "intra-sentential code switching" was assigned if it occurred within the same
sentence. Table 4.1 indicates that out of the 100 instances of code switching intra-sentential code
switching occurred 70 (70%) times while inter-sentential code switching occurred 30 (30%) times.
This means that in the 400 minutes of lecture time, intra-sentential code switching occurred after
every 6 minutes while inter sentential code switching occurred after every 13.3 minutes. The fact
that code switching is the last in the list of the most frequently occurring propositional discourse
strategies in the data may imply that the lecturers observe the university requirement to use English
throughout a lecture session. However, the use of Kiswahili by all lecturers, though at different
levels during the observed lectures, indicates how it is difficult to sanction an individual against
resorting to a familiar language in case he or she deems it necessary. In section 4.2.5.2, I
demonstrate the occurrence of intra-sentential code switching and in section 4.2.5.3; I demonstrate
the occurrence of inter-sentential code switching.

4.2.6.1 Intra sentential code-switching

As noted earlier, intra sentential code switching occurs within a sentence in a single turn or stretch
of discourse. The findings of this study indicate that lecturers used more intra sentential codes
switching than inter sentential code switching. Excerpt (23) shows how lecturers used intra
sentential code switching for clarifying and advising purposes. Excerpt (24) illustrates how lecturers
use code switching to clarify a point and excerpt (25) illustrates how they use it for exemplification
Gulzar (2009:37) finds that in such instances code switching does not only assist the lecturer in
clarifying, advising and giving directives, but also in simplifying expression.

(23)
1 When you see the country is peaceful … there is somebody who must have
2 done something. Na ndiyo maana [and that is why] as a new
3 generation … you should also aim at … trying to pay mchango wako
4 [your contribution] …
LPsc.1
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

114

In excerpt (23), the lecturer continues a topic about what Africans who struggled for the
independence of Africa contributed a great deal that being the reason why countries like Tanzania
are peaceful (line 1). She code switches to Kiswahili to clarify what the new generation should do to
emulate the ancestors (line 2). She finally advises students, as a new generation on what they should
try to do "… trying to pay mchango wako'.

(24)
1 So this particular relationship between these two sets of individuals is
2 mediated by inanimate thing called "gari" [car]. So through "gari"
3 this particular power of these particular individuals is mediated.
LSoc.2

In excerpt (excerpt 24), the lecturer is explaining how the owner of a commuter bus relates to the
driver and the conductor of the bus through the bus itself. In demonstrating how that relationship
exits, the lecturer uses the Kiswahili word for car 'through the gari [car]' to clarify how in materialist
contexts power relations can be mediated by inanimate things.

(25)
1 Now, this one it depends upon your office, upon your office, not the
2 office holder, he may be the shortest, but he is the boss; the Chief
3 Executive Officer; shortest, shortest man like a mbilikimo [dwarf] but
4 is the boss because of the position he or she is holding.
LPsc.4

In excerpt (25), the lecturer differentiates different types of authority and clarifies how they differ
(line 1-2). Then he uses a simile '… shortest man like a mbilikimo [dwarf] to emphasise the point
that an individual's physical characteristics do not count when it comes to issues of authority. This
usage creates not only humour but also creates a sense of belonging because it uses the term
'mbilikimo', which is very familiar to students and it is often used as derogatory when remarking on
peoples height.

4.2.6.2 Inter sentential code-switching

As opposed to intra sentential code switching, inter sentential code switching occurred when
lecturers code switched between sentences. The following excerpts illustrate how lecturers used
inter sentential code switching to achieve different communicative goals such as to elaborate a
process (excerpt 26) and to check understanding (excerpt 27). Uys (2010:33ff) finds that lecturers
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

115

may code switch to explain a point, confirm understanding, encourage students' participation and
give general instructions.

(26)
1 A process through which they acquire a culture, which is viewed as consistent,
2 coherent, definite and so, in the process of growing up people acquire a culture.
3 Wanakunywa ile [they drink that culture] as a process, as a passive process
LSoc.4

In excerpt (26), the lecturer explains how the people acquire through a meticulous process. The
lecturer compares the process to drinking. 'Wanakunywa ile …' [they drink that culture] (line 3).
This code switching practice helps the lecturer simplify his expression by means of a simple but
very familiar process (drinking). The usage also helps the lecturer create humour thus holding
students' attention and interest.

(27)
1 … rather than the continuing relations with the metropolitan countries.
2 Topic number two … "hiyo mmeichukua?" [Did you take that?]. Should I
3 repeat?
LPsc.2

In excerpt (27), the lecturer is reading to students a series of seminar questions for them to prepare
for next seminar session. Whenever she reads it students rumble to indicate that they have not
written down the question properly. After re-reading the seminar question for several times, the
lecturer resorts to use of Kiswahili to crosscheck if students have written down the question properly
'… hiyo mmeichukua?' [Did you take that?].

In summary, these findings presented in the above examples reflect the observation by Zabrodskaja
(2007) that bilingual teachers use two languages to teach the academic content. They switch
between the languages spontaneously or intentionally. They may further decide when to code
switch in order to facilitate comprehension and meaningful involvement (Zabrodskaja, 2007:124).
Generally, the lecturers code switch between English and Kiswahili to perform social functions such
as to advise students to work hard so that they may contribute to national development, to encourage
them to persevere in studies, to give them directives, to create humour, to socialise with students, to
clarify, to emphasise and to simplify expression. This implies that the lecturer believes that students
can easily be encouraged to pay attention in their familiar language, Kiswahili. In the study on how
teachers in secondary schools in South Africa code switch during classroom interaction. These
findings suggest that code switching, if taken as a strategy and not deficit, can contribute in teaching
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

116

and learning in multilingual societies such as Tanzania. In that light, it is important, as Li (2008:1)
suggests that in multilingual situations there should be empirical studies to view the circumstances
under which classroom code-switching is necessary, identify pedagogically sound and productive
code-switching practices, and disseminate good code-switching practices through demonstrations,
workshops, and teacher-training.

4.2.7 Lecturers' motivation for use of discourse strategies

Section 4.2 discussed the lecturers' use of different types of repetition, questioning and code
switching practices in lectures at the University of Dar es Salaam. This section relates the observed
lecturers' classroom practices to their interpretations during interviews. As explained earlier (cf.
section 4.1), the interview data was collected in order to supplement and check the empirical data
obtained in the lectures. After reading the lecture transcripts and identifying the most notable
propositional discourse strategies, I conducted an interview with all participating lecturers
specifically seeking information regarding their reasons for using the three strategies in the way that
they actually did. It should be noted that the interviews were not based on the sub types of the
identified strategies because it would have involved technical aspects that were not necessarily
obvious to the participants. Considering the sensitivity of the topic, which on the surface looked like
intrusive into lecturers' linguistic competence, I had to avoid the use of questions that implied a
probe into the participants' linguistic knowledge. The interview data focused on two major topics.
The first paid attention to those strategies that were observed in the lecture transcripts. The second
paid attention to those strategies that the lecturers mentioned in addition to the ones I mentioned.
Moreover, as part of the enquiry, the interview asked questions concerning the lecturers' views on
how the English only policy affects students' academic progress and whether Kiswahili could
equally function as LoI. The interview also sought lecturers' elaboration on how they assist students
once they realise that they are battling with English during lectures and how they regard the
strategies they use in terms of effectiveness. Finally, the interview sought lecturers' comment on
whether the strategies they use vary when they teach other classes besides the first years.

4.2.7.1 Lecturers' motivation for use of repetition in lectures

All the eight lecturers reported that they use repetition hoping that it facilitates learning. Three major
themes that emerged from the data are that the lecturers use repetition to link topics (excerpt 28), to
revise or re emphasise a previous lecture or lecture content (excerpt 29) and to clarify a point
(excerpt 30).
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

117

(28)
This [repetition] makes it possible for students to recognize links when learning … I do
these things [repetition] believing that repetitions are both important and helpful for
students learning any subject and help them to link topics …
LSoc.1

According to excerpt (28), the lecturer uses repetition to create linkage not only within one subject
but also across subjects and topics. This means that the lecturer does not only repeat content to
create topic continuity and cohesion during lecture sessions, but he also necessarily repeats content
in other related fields of knowledge and at different levels of education to help students realise the
connection between knowledge acquired in lower levels of learning and that acquired from other
courses at university. This practice is likely to help students apply the knowledge they acquire in
different situations thus actively engage in the learning process.

(29)
You know repetition ... normally when you introduce a subject matter there are different
approaches. You can start from where you left the other time and when you are concluding, as a
way of recap, you can go back to what you have covered in that lecture session as a matter of
picking up the basic elements that you would like students to internalise and grasp. I repeated as
a way of re emphasising.
LPsc.4

Excerpt (29) implies that the lecturer purposefully uses repetition to help students internalise the
content taught. He acknowledges that repetition assists him in choosing the type of teaching
approach to use, such as making a revision of the previous topic. The lecturer also uses repetition to
conclude the topic or summarise the content thus emphasising the basic points for students to grasp.
Content systematically presented that way is likely to be easily internalised and processed in the
students' memory thus be readily retrievable for specific academic purposes such as answering of
examination questions.

(30)
If you used certain concepts or certain vocabularies, you need to change them so as to make
them easier so that they can understand you. … You can actually see that by the manner you
have taught this student has understood. You can see the facial expression. If it shows that
students are still not understanding, then you repeat that point but by giving some more
examples or by repeating in different language and so on, so that they understand.
LSoc.3
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

118

Excerpt (30) illustrates how the lecturer uses repetition in response to students' behaviour that
signifies non-understanding of the subject matter. The lecturer does not only repeat the concepts but
also provides examples and varies the linguistic choice to simplify students' grasp of the content.

4.2.7.2 Lecturers facilitate classroom interaction

Generally excerpts (28, 29, 30) above illustrate that lecturers purposefully use linguistic resources
such as repetition to facilitate classroom interaction. As Tannen (2007:9) comments, repetition
creates texture and coherence in a text or conversation. Literature on the functions of repetition in
classroom settings indicates that interlocutors mainly use it to mitigate comprehension problems.
Watterson (2008:392) regards this practice as effective in facilitating listener understanding.
Bjorkman's (2011) study on the use of ELF in a Swedish university established that the major
function of repetition was to emphasise. Kaur (2010:205) commends repetition for increasing
comprehensibility and accessibility of a prior talk by providing the hearer with additional
information. Generally, Norrick (1987:245) regards repetition as an inherent tool in conversation
that helps speakers repeat their own conversations and echo conversations of their interlocutors. It
facilitates task completion, rendering of discourse coherence and realisation of particular
conversational strategies.

4.2.7.3 Lecturers motivation for use of questions in lectures

Section 4.2.4 categorised the lecturers' use of different types of questions. This section relates the
lecturers' use of questions in the classroom to their responses during the interview. The lecturers
were asked whether the observed use of questions during classroom interaction was considered
deliberate or merely following a familiar lecture framework. In response, all eight lecturers reported
that they are aware of their regular use of such question modes and that they do so to achieve
various communicative goals. The goals include checking for understanding (excerpt 31), attracting
students' attention and pressing them for participation in the content of the lecture (excerpt 32). One
lecturer went further, mentioning that he also uses questions as a means to urging students to read,
as they lack a good academic reading culture (excerpt 33).
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

119

(31)
… you know, questioning is used sometimes to crosscheck if the students understand what you
are teaching. … Therefore, when teaching, questioning helps students to participate in the class.
It helps them understand and also this helps me to evaluate if I have successfully met my lecture
objectives. When you ask a question and they answer you are in a situation to correct them so
that no rote learning can take place. You know if they go for their discussions without a clear
understanding of what you have taught, they might discuss things wrongly. You know these
students lie to each other when they are discussing if they did not understand well in the
lectures. As well when the teacher responds to their questions it gives them consensus to doubts
that might have caused them misunderstand certain points. Therefore, questioning is an
important strategy in teaching here.
LSoc.1

In excerpt (31), the lecturer argues that he uses questions to check for understanding, to stimulate
students' participation, to evaluate his own teaching, to prevent rote learning by students, and to
resolve students' misunderstanding of the content. The conscious monitoring of the teaching and
learning process is a response to the lecturer's awareness of the possible communication breakdown
that may result from the use of English language as LoI.

(32)
One is to crosscheck whether you are on the same frequency and sometimes you use questions
to attract responses as a way of ... because you are not teaching tabula rasa. These are people
who are supposed to have some knowledge because at the beginning you give them what to
read. A good student should read even before the lecture, so, is also a way of encouraging them
to read. Our students don't read extensively and intensively but some of the good students would
read the topic before you deliver in the lecture ...
LPsc.4

Similar to excerpt (31), in excerpt (32) the lecturer argues that he uses questioning to check students'
understanding. Moreover, he uses questions to attract students' responses, as they also possess some
prior knowledge of the subject matter. Thus, the lecturer uses questioning strategy as a means to
stimulate students' latent knowledge thereby encouraging them to develop a good academic reading
culture.

(33)
Asking them questions … It is a good way of helping them to think about the materials which I
am teaching instead of just going on without, I mean, without asking them anything. If I ask
them and feel that I don't get the answer, so it gives me some information. It is information to
me that probably they haven't understood or maybe they don't know to answer. So, I think it is a
way for me to find out.
LSoc.4
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

120

According to excerpt (33), lecturer uses questions not only for checking comprehension but also for
self-evaluation on the part of the lecturer so that he can improve on the teaching methods. Like the
previous examples, the focus is on soliciting as much information from the students as possible so
that the lecturer can plan on how to mitigate possible communication breakdown.

4.2.7.4 Lecturers motivation for code switching in lectures

When asked as to elaborate on observed practices of code switch between English and Kiswahili, all
the eight lecturers reported that they resort to Kiswahili once they realize that students do not quite
follow or understand the subject matter (excerpt 34). One lecturer went even further to admit that
the situation compels him to code switch although it is against the university regulation (35).

(34)
Of course I use Kiswahili when I want students to understand me more. I decide to use a story
or explain a concept in Kiswahili because I know my students. When I use Kiswahili they start
wondering ... was this the concept? ... It is as, I said, when I repeat twice and ask them if they
understand and they say no! I use Kiswahili with simple examples in kiswahili then I am
convinced that they have understood. I know that may be they have not written down the
concept, but at least they have understood it.
LPsc.2

In excerpt (34), the lecturer argues that she uses Kiswahili during lectures to facilitate
understanding, by providing some kind of translation, exemplification, simplification and mitigation
of spelling errors.

(35)
I normally talk in Kiswahili. In the requirements of the university we are supposed to talk in
English and not Kiswahili. But I do violate it especially when I realize that students cannot
understand concepts or theory in English, I decide to use Kiswahili hoping that they may grasp
the concepts. Although I am not sure if they understand if I use Kiswahili, I normally believe
that if I use Kiswahili at a certain point they will be able to understand better than if I persist in
using English …
LSoc.2

According to excerpt (35), the lecturer uses Kiswahili with the same purpose with others, which is
to facilitate understanding. The lecturer's concern that the students do not understand the content
obliges him to defy the English only regulation. Nevertheless, the lecturer seems to be uncertain
regarding the real contribution that using Kiswahili achieves during lectures.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

121

(36)
In some cases, I have a tendency of asking, like in my class, if there is anyone who doesn't
speak Swahili because I know that at some point I will have to switch to Kiswahili. You know,
so as to make thinks clearer. So, usually I have this tendency of asking if there is any non-
Swahili speaker. I have to be strict. I try as much as possible to speak strictly in English. But if
they are all Kiswahili speakers, every now and then I will try, like if I say something and I see,
you know, people are looking at you as if you are from another planet, so I will switch to
Kiswahili so that, like when I want to break down things, to give more explanations,
clarifications. Then you have to use Kiswahili.
LPsc.3

In excerpt (36), the lecturer argues that he code switches to clarify concepts, but only when there are
no no-Swahili speakers in the class. This indicates how deliberate the practice is because the lecturer
understands the situation the students are in because of learning in an unfamiliar language.

All the above lecturers' contributions regarding their reasons for using the different discourse
strategies largely relate to the using of English as lingua franca in higher education. Studies on how
lecturers and students use English as lingua franca indicate that they observe a careful choice and
use of linguistic and non linguistic forms to facilitate communication. As Björkman (2012:960)
remarks, English as Lingua Franca setting is complex not only to students but also to lecturers thus
requiring lecturers to invest greatly in different strategies to facilitate classroom
communication. Moreover, literature on the use of English as lingua franca indicates that
lecturers in such settings pay attention to deploy several strategies to mitigate communication
breakdown. These strategies include what has been identified as use of questions (cf. Morell,
2004), rephrasing or repetition (cf. Swales, 2001), and signalling of important content (cf.
Björkman, 2011), Code switching (cf. Taha, 2009). Moreover, the data analyzed here relates
to the issues of bilingualism and multilingualism. The identified discourse strategies are
characteristic of speakers in bilingual situations. Literature on bilingual speakers, such as the
lecturers involved in this study, indicates that bilinguals access certain advantages that
monolinguals do not. It is argued, for example, that bilingual teachers use two languages
interchangeably to teach the same content (cf. Zabrodskaja, 2007). It has also been observed that
bilingual speakers are advantaged in being able to use two languages at the same time (cf. Bialystok,
2011) and being context sensitive (cf. Cenoz, 2003).

4.2.8 Lecturers motivation for use of other strategies

In the interviews lecturers could give additional information and answer probing questions in order
to allow wider perspective on why the lecturers used not only the observed discourse strategies but
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

122

also possible other strategies during classroom interaction. The first set of questions in the interview
focused on how lecturers view students in terms of English language proficiency, challenges they
face having to learn in English, and how lecturers consider their task of facilitating learning. The
interview sought lecturers' opinion on which language should function as LoI or as supporting the
current LoI. The second set of questions focussed on how the strategies that lecturers use vary
according to levels of learners, and on the lecturers' evaluation of the effectiveness of the strategies
they use in facilitating teaching and learning. The following sections present and discuss responses
from the lecturers in relation to the two sets of interview questions.

4.2.8.1 Views on students' proficiency related challenges

Regarding the envisaged All the eight lecturers admitted that generally most students relatively have
low proficiency in the English language and that this has an impact on their academic progress
(excerpt 37).

(37)
I can say that for the time I have been teaching at the University of Dar es salaam, the ability of
my students in the Department of Sociology to communicate or explain something in English
language has been very low and this in a way has been affecting their ability to understand
issues we teach. This is because we teach in English and so, for one who doesn't master English,
it becomes very difficult to understand concepts which we use
LSoc.2

Excerpt (37) demonstrates the lecturers' concern about the challenges that learners face due to their
low English language proficiency. The lecturer observes that from his experience students face
obstacles learning in English, which in turn affects their ability to communicate in the language.

4.2.8.2 Lecturers' intervention

Concerning how the lecturers intervene to facilitate learning, all the lecturers reported that they use
more strategies than just the major three identified in the transcripts, such as exemplifying and
writing on the board (excerpts 38 and 39).
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

123

(38)
When you are preparing the lesson it has to be as if you are making pulp. You need to prepare it
the way it will be easier for one to eat. Similarly, you need to make the lesson in an easier way
otherwise all the students will be left puzzled. If it is about terminologies, you need to soften the
terms such that the lesson is presented in an easiest language possible. If the class has no
foreigner, examples can be given in Swahili especially for first year who have never learned
sociology before. This can help them understand easily because they all know Swahili.
Otherwise, you will be singing new songs to them. For first years who have never learned
sociology, these terminologies will be compared to deep sleep. You are talking of sociological
imagination; you won't be understood. Therefore, you need to reduce what you are teaching to
the level that can be manageable to learn. Sometimes you need to repeat the whole lesson to
make sure students understand what you have taught them.
LSoc.1

Excerpt (38) indicates that a lecturer simplifies the input in English in order to facilitate
understanding. He compares the process of preparing the lesson to preparing 'pulp'. He uses
examples in Kiswahili and sometimes he repeats the whole lesson.

(39)
I do that because I know that our students have a problem. You may mention a concept; they
may not even know how to spell it. So, you write it so that they don't miss-spell the word, so
that they know how the word is written. You do it purposely and it will help them in their note
taking exercise.
LPsc.4

According to excerpt (39) lecturers use the white or chalk board to facilitate understanding of
concepts that seem new to students. This strategy helps them not attend to students' spelling
problems emanating from the lecturers' use of unfamiliar English terminologies characteristic of
university level of learning, but also help students develop good note taking skills.

4.2.8.3 Lecturers' views on LoI

The lecturers gave different opinions as to which language should be used as LoI in Tanzania's
higher education. Four lecturers showed interest in more use of Kiswahili; three preferred the
current English only policy, while one remained ambivalent (excerpts 40, 41 and 42).
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

124

(40)
I would go for Kiswahili. I have always been open. Well, definitely even nowadays many
people are teaching, they invariably do not talk all the time in English. They can change some
times to Kiswahili. It is easier to talk in Kiswahili. But maybe I think because we are used. We
have been taught in English and the way you read many of the books are still written in English
and so on. So, sometimes it is easy to use English so that even when we shall be teaching in
Kiswahili, you will find that many people will be using, throwing in some English words. I
suppose moving to the Kiswahili will be, yeah, will be a better way. I would go for Kiswahili.
LPsc.3

Excerpt (40) illustrates how some lecturers, as it is true in many postcolonial societies, feel that their
local languages are not developed enough to function as LoI. The lecturer despite admitting to the
fact that it is easier to talk in Kiswahili, he notes some potential obstacles to its effectiveness because
most learning and teaching materials are still written in English.

(41)
Well, definitely even nowadays many people are teaching, invariably they do not talk all the
time in English. They can change some times to Kiswahili. It is easier to talk in Kiswahili. But
maybe I think because we are used. We have been taught in English and the way you read many
of the books are still written in English and so on. So sometimes it is easy to use English so that
even when we shall be teaching in Kiswahili, you will find that many people will be using,
throwing in some English words. I suppose moving to the Kiswahili will be, yeah, will be a
better way. I would go for Kiswahili.
LSoc.4

Like excerpt (40), excerpt (41) illustrates how lecturers feel that it is difficult to move completely
from English to Kiswahili. The lecturer acknowledges the current practice by which they are code
switches between English and Kiswahili and predicts that code switching will continue even when
lecturers will be allowed to use Kiswahili as LoI that people will also switch to English.

(42)
In my personal opinion, I say that Kiswahili should be used as a language of instruction in
universities of this country because this is the language we use every day but we have not
developed and computerized it, to write and read it technically. We know how to use Kiswahili
in normal talk but we need Kiswahili that can be used to teach subjects such as chemistry, social
sciences and so forth. There is technical vocabulary which students should be familiar with. For
me, what we reiterate every day is that if we can develop a Kiswahili that can be used in
chemistry and so forth, not only today, tomorrow or after tomorrow, it will be very useful. But
for now, since we have not developed technical Kiswahili, let us continue with English.
LSoc.3

Excerpt (42) illustrates the opinion of lecturers who support the use of Kiswahili as LoI in
universities, even if some have reservations. According to the lecturer, assigning Kiswahili the role
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

125

of LoI would be because it is a language of wider communication. However, the lecturer cautions
that the attempt to allow Kiswahili such role would be futile if there are no stringent measures to
upgrade the language to the level of being technically able to cater for all subjects, in both natural
and social sciences.

4.2.8.4 Change of strategies due to class level and effectiveness of strategies

All lecturers reported that they taught other classes and admitted that the strategies vary when they
teach senior classes because they assume that senior students have mastered the university academic
register in English to the extent that they can stand on their own without assistance of such practices
as repetition, questioning or code switching. Accordingly, all lecturers view the strategies as useful
in facilitating teaching and learning in the first year but they believe less support is required when
students progress to senior classes. Excerpts (43) and (44) illustrate their responses.

(43)
There is a difference, I could say. You know with first years, I think maybe it is because of
education system from secondary school. First years are quite fresh, you know, and they are not
used to this rigor and vigor of the university studies, you know. So sometimes you have to be
soft a little bit, you know, and in most cases use the language of encouraging because it is quite
a new environment for them. But it is different from third year. Third year you expect that they
have been here, I mean they have been around for long enough to understand their
responsibility, what they are supposed to do, what we expect actually from them. So the kind of
encouragement that we give for first year students is different from, I am not saying that we
don't encourage first year students, we do but the level of this emphasis in terms of
encouragement differs and for third year you don't have to, in most cases as far as I have
experienced, you don't have to, like explain each and everything, going into details like telling
them the meanings of the words. They have already, you know, they are already used to some
vocabulary, so you don't' have to break down the vocabulary. This is, I mean, different from first
year students.
LPsc.3

Excerpt (43) illustrates the lecturers' view that the strategies they use and the kind and amount of
assistance they provide to first year students differ from the one they provide to higher classes. All
this difference is because lecturers are aware of the first year students' relatively low level of
proficiency in the English language remembering that they are exposed to the university academic
register for the first time.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

126

(44)
They (the strategies) are helpful. For sure they help. What I have discovered is that when you,
for example, give them tests or exams, they do well and the number of students who pass
exceeds those failing and this makes me feel that students understand and that the strategies I am
using are useful.
LSoc.1

Excerpt (44) illustrates the lecturers' belief about the usefulness of the strategies they use in teaching
first year students. The lecturers believe that a careful use of the strategies results in improved
students' academic performance.

4.3 STRUCTURAL DISCOURSE STRATEGIES

The analysis so far has focused on propositional discourse strategies that occurred most frequently
in the eight lectures observed with a view to determining generic features of such large-group
lectures in a multilingual community of students and lecturers. It included a discussion of the
reasons lecturers gave for using the strategies that were found to be generic. The lecturers'
perceptions and explanation of the strategies were related to the analysis of the features of lectures
themselves, in order to gain as much insight as possible into the complex set of considerations that
shape the oral practices of lectures at this particular site of higher education. In the next section, the
analysis focuses on the structural discourse strategies that occurred most frequently in the eight
lectures. As in the case of the propositional discourse strategies, the findings presented here
demonstrate how lecturers in a multilingual educational setting such as the University of Dar es
Salaam, utilise formal, structural linguistic resources, specifically discourse markers and personal
pronouns, to conduct classroom interaction. Typically, these formal devices function as means to
construct cohesion and to indicate stance that is, positioning of the speaker and the hearer in
discourse.

As noted before in section 4.2, the analysis in this section attends to generic features of the lectures,
and specifically to the discursive contributions of the lecturers. The eight lectures were carefully
scrutinised in order to recognise regularly occurring structural discourse strategies. Using NviVo,
the coding and querying of the data helped recognise all instances of the most frequently used
structural discourse strategies. The most widely used strategies according to the simple test of a
distribution count, discussed below, are (i) discourse markers, and (ii) specific pronouns. The
particular discourse markers that were widely used in these lectures, apparently in creating
coherence and topic continuity, include forms such as so and now. Pronouns that were widely used
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

127

with similar cohesive and continuative functions refer to either the speaker or the hearer (s). First,
there is a wide use of the second person singular and plural pronouns, both coded as you, and both
used in reference to the hearers (all or some singled out) in the lecture.

Second, there is a wide use of the first person plural pronoun we, which is a more inclusive way of
the speaker referring to him/herself as one of a group of scholars, or as one in solidarity with the
hearers.6 Third, there is a wide use of the first person singular pronoun I. Sections 4.3.1 to 4.3.2
describe and analyse the discourse markers so and now. Sections 4.3.3 to 4.3.4 describe and analyse
the most frequently used pronouns, namely I, we and you. A word frequency query was run to
ascertain the actual number of times each occurred, and their concordances were checked in all of
the eight lecture scripts. Table 4.2 presents the results for this set of data in this relatively small
closed corpus.

Table 4.2: Most frequently used structural discourse markers in the lectures

LPSc. LSoc. T
SDSs 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 08
DMs So 27 06 43 20 61 17 88 16 278
Now 38 07 05 13 07 07 36 00 113
G/total 391
Pron You 43 47 103 91 93 35 108 14 534
We 118 62 33 47 62 63 99 34 518
I 43 21 62 55 44 41 32 23 321
G/total 1373

4.3.1 Defining and exemplifying discourse markers so and now

As noted earlier (cf. 2.2.5), the field of discourse analysis has evoked quite a discussion about the
definition, categorisation, the meaning and functions of discourse markers. Fraser (1999:932)
defines them as a class of lexical expressions of the same syntactic class as conjunctions, adverbs
and prepositional phrases. Fraser (1999:932) further finds that they function to signal a relationship

6
There is of course also the so called "Royal plural", where a speaker refers to him/herself only, by using the plural rather
than the singular form. This is often used to create or affirm distance between speaker and hearer. Such use of "we" has
also been identified as a means of directing attention away from the speaker personally. Thus in saying "we" when an
opinion is being given, the speaker signals that s/he is not the only one who holds such an opinion, but that it is a more
widely accepted idea and thus should be convincing.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

128

between the interpretation of the segment7 they introduce and the prior one, with their interpretation
resulting from the interplay between both the linguistic and conceptual context in a process that
yields a procedural rather than conceptual meaning. In the grammar of English, discourse markers
occupy similar status to conjunctions such as 'and', adverbs such as 'well', and lexicalised phrases
such as 'you know'. In language use, they bracket discourse by marking relations between
sequentially dependent units of discourse (Schiffrin, 1987:31). Fraser provides the following
examples to demonstrate how inclusive and accommodative the category of discourse markers can
be. The discourse markers are underlined for easy identification.

(44) a. A: I like him. B: So, you think you will ask him out then.

b. John can't go. And many others can't go either.

c. Will you go? Furthermore, will you represent the class there?

d. Sue left very late. But she arrived on time.

e. I think it will fly. After all, we built it right.

(Adapted from Fraser, 1999:932)

The underlined discourse markers in (45) illustrate how discourse markers occur in an utterance.
Levinson (1983:87ff) observes that they mostly occur in utterance initial position, showing how the
utterance that follows responds to the former or continues it or some portion of it. Although some
studies argue that discourse markers are syntactically free, grammatically functionless and somehow
semantically bleached (Lee, 2004:117), they do function as semantic and pragmatic sign posts (Tay,
2011:311). For example in (52a), 'B' uses the discourse marker so to introduce a question about
whether A's utterance 'I like him' amounts to 'A' asking the person (him) out. The use of the
discourse marker so in such a way illustrates how speakers give discourse coherence through
relations between adjacent units in discourse (Schiffrin, 1987:24). Thus, according to Schiffrin
(1987:25) so assists speaker 'B' in justifying his or her act of commenting or suggesting 'So, you
think you will ask him out then' and at the same time speaker 'B' marks the cause for the belief that
speaker 'A' should ask the person (him) out.

As for the discourse marker now, Schiffrin (1987:228ff) finds that speakers use it to emphasise a
point, preface an argument, manage turn taking and propel a topic forward. In a study on the use of

7
I use the term segment in the sense of Fraser (1999:938) to refer to proposition, sentence, message and utterance. Thus,
the numbers in the examples refer to segments and not lines.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

129

now in the court of law, Hale (1999:74-5) found that lawyers use it to resume a previously
mentioned topic (46), control the flow of information (47), and mark contradiction (48).

(46) Now, Mr Lopez, you said you had just passed Shane Street?

(47) Now, uh, was the motor vehicle insured other than uh compulsory third party?

(48) Now, just pause there, do you remember what month of the year 1992 it was?

4.3.2 Characterising the discourse markers so and now in lecture discourse

4.3.2.1 Discourse marker so

As Table 4.2 indicates, the discourse marker so occurred 278 (71%) times in the eight lectures.
Studies on discourse analysis indicate that so has a remarkably high status. For example, Lam
(2010:657) notes that it is one of the most occurring items in spoken English and O'Keeffe et al.
(2007) report that in the five million word Cambridge and Nottingham Corpus of Discourse English
(CANCODE), so is the 19th most frequently occurring item. Lam (2010:661) further identifies six
functions of so in discourse namely framing, linking, showing consequentiality response, processing
and turn managing. For this study, in the closed corpus of approximately 37 thousand words, so was
the 15th most frequently used word. Excerpt (49) illustrates how lecturers use so to emphasise,
elaborate, and continue a topic.

(49)
1 So, … that spirit of spending very little but working very hard Weber was able to locate it
within one of the so many protestant sects…. which he called Calvinism.
2 So, Calvinism is one of the so many protestant sects.
3 So, Calvinism in this context was a sect that had been brought. That was a belief brought
by a person called John.
4 So, John Calvin was the founder of Calvinism.
5 So, you can say Calvin was like Martin Luther, Calvin was also a Germany.
6 So, they all challenged the way the Roman Catholic Church was doing things. They never
agreed on what they were writing, they never.
7 So, you can't say that Martin Luther and John Calvin were arguing in the same way
8 So, Weber was able to find the spirit of capitalism in the teachings of John Calvin
LSoc.3

Excerpt (49) is one exceptional instance by which a lecturer uses one form so in a single stretch of
speech while illustrating different functions of the same form. Generally, it can be observed that in
excerpt (49) the lecturer uses so mainly to mark continuity (Hansen, 1997:160; Fraser, 1990:186;
Schiffrin, 1987:31), thus to facilitate cohesion. Specifically, in line (1), the lecturer uses so to
elaborate a previous topic, namely the spirit of spending very little but working very hard. In line
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

130

(2), he uses so with some expansion to link Calvinism to the protestant sects and in line (3) he uses
so to expand the name 'John' to 'John Calvin' (line 4) before he uses it to introduce a conclusive link
thus, drawing a consequence from a foregoing discourse. 'So, you can say Calvin was like Martin
Luther' (Biber et al., 1999:877). In line (5) he specifies the similarity of the two German church
fathers of the Reformation (Calvin and Luther) and expands on their differences 'So they all
challenged the way the Roman Catholic Church was doing things … they never agreed …' (line 6).
In line (7) so again marks the link by showing the divergence between Calvin and Luther 'So you
can't say Martin Luther and John Calvin were arguing in the same way' (Biber et al., 1999:877).
Lastly, in line (8), it facilitates the resumptive turning to the main point mentioned earlier in
discourse 'So, Weber was able … able to find the spirit of capitalism in the teachings of John Calvin'
(cf. Lam, 2010:662). Generally these findings replicate the observation made by Bolden (2008:974)
that so is a resource for establishing discourse coherence and, more fundamentally, accomplishing
understanding.

4.3.2.1 The discourse marker now

As Table 4.2 indicates, only one lecturer (LSoc.4) did not use now as a discourse marker at all.
Nevertheless, the discourse marker now occurred 113 (29%) times across the seven remaining
lectures. From a grammatical point of view, now is used in different situations such as an adverb
signifying time (50). In addition to the functions mentioned by Schiffrin (1987) and Hale (1999)
above, in spoken language the discourse marker now can perform a series of other functions. It can
function in getting someone's attention before continuing or changing the subject (51), or asking for
information (52). It can also introduce gap filler or function as a gap filler (53) or express
conditionality (54).

(50) They now live in the city centre.

(51) Now, let's move on to the question of payment.

(52) Now what did you say your name was?

(53) Now, let's see, oh yes - they wanted to know what time you'll be back on Friday.

(54) Now if I'd been in charge there's no way I'd have let them use the van.

(Examples from the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (2005)

Practically, Fraser (1988:28) positions now in the group of topic markers functioning to direct the
hearer's attention to the current topic, while Quirk et al. (1985:639) classify it in the group of
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

131

transitional words. This categorisation of the discourse marker now explains much of the functions
it performs in the lectures observed. Excerpt (55) illustrates the use of now by the lecturers.

(55)
1 Now, don't ask me how they reacted. If you want to know how they reacted, you
2 should go to History and read for yourself. Now, what was it they were looking
3 for? Why? Why did they react? Because they realized that those people were
4 coming not for their civilization. Now, this group 'B' takes us … and they are the
5 ones who are going to give us the meaning of 'decolonization'. Now, during the
6 years between the two world wars … Now, we are talking about the time of the
7 colonial period. Africans sought to get away from colonial, political, social order.
LPsc.1

In excerpt (55), the lecturer is referring to how Africans reacted against colonial rule so that they
could decolonise themselves. She starts by reminding students of what their topic is (the nature of
'decolonisation'), and then says that she will not give the history as to how Africans reacted in her
lecture; such historical data they have to find themselves (line 1-2). She uses a seemingly direct
question, apparently soliciting information from students about why they (Africans) reacted the way
they did (line 2-3), which she immediately answers herself thus indicating that her intention is not
primarily to ask a question but to propel the narration forward. The lecturer re-introduces a topic that
she mentioned several segments earlier, with the phrase "now this group B" (line 4) implying that
there are at least two groups, 'A' and 'B'. This is connected to the African reaction she is topicalising,
and serves to show how it facilitates the understanding of the concept 'decolonisation' (line 4-5). She
further re-introduces the time of the reaction 'the years between the two World wars' (line 5-6),
before she specifies the period with "Now we are talking about the colonial period", and provides
the reason for the reaction (line 6-7).

One of the predominant functions of now in the lectures observed is that of focusing a topic (cf.
Fraser, 1990:388; Schiffrin, 1987:228ff.). For university classroom interaction, Biber (2006:69-70)
observes that lecturers commonly use the discourse marker now to initiate a new topic as a next step
in the logical progression of an oral presentation. Excerpt (56) demonstrates how lecturers' use of
now performs some of the functions identified in the relevant literature. In line (1), the lecturer uses
now to perform three functions simultaneously. First, she draws students' attention to the main
theme of the lecture by emphasising topic continuity; at the same time, she is instructing students
not to ask questions about a previous segment thus negotiating the right to control the flow of
information. Finally she also uses now as a focusing device (Fraser, 1990:388). In line (1) the
lecturer reminds students that the focus in that segment is not on the 'how' of decolonisation in
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

132

Africa. In line (2), she uses a second now to indicate a different orientation from reporting what
happened to asking why things happened. More specifically, as Hale (1999:75) puts it, she uses a -
question as preface to giving new information. This function is simultaneously topic progression
and focusing since the question-form is in fact more attention directing than being the first turn in a
question-answer sequence that involves two participants and would expect an answer from the
second participant. In line (4) the lecturer introduces a distinction between two groups of Africans,
'A' and 'B', where the contribution of the B-group is indicated as pertinent to the topic. She then talks
about a segment earlier in the lecture, 'the period between the two world wars', thus achieving topic
progression and focusing in (line 6). In line (7) she finally uses now to introduce specification of the
period not only in terms of time, but also in terms of what identifies the period for their enquiry,
namely '… the colonial period', thus still focussing the topic. In summary, the use of now is used in
this excerpt to establish, clarify or reiterate a previous point, and to control the flow of information.

4.3.3 Defining and exemplifying the use of pronouns

Table 4.2 indicates that overall you are numerically the most used pronoun with 534 (38.89%)
instances. This pronoun is, in formal terms, ambiguous in that the singular and plural forms are
identical. Thus, in addressing the hearers, the speaker could be referring to one hearer specifically,
to all hearers inclusively, or to a section of the hearers. Additionally, you can be used in much more
general, modal terms, as an equivalent of "any person", in reference to an imaginary actor as in "If
you were to add x to y …", where "you" could be replaced with "a person". Therefore, in the
analysis below, the use of you as a signifier has to be carefully considered.

The first person plural pronoun, we, was the second most frequently occurring pronoun with 518
(37.72%) instances out of 1373 instances of occurrences of pronouns that refer to speakers or
hearers in this particular discourse. The first person singular pronoun, I, was used considerably less
often with 321 (23.37%) instances. The difference of 197 instances between the occurrences of we
and I is very remarkable particularly considering that in this context the two terms are often used
interchangeably that is, we is in many cases an alternative to I. The plural form is used to refer to the
singular, to the speaker only (with possibly, but not necessarily, an added implication of either
including other scholars or including the audience in the particular position the speaker is
advocating). The lecturers at times used we to refer to the students and lecturer inclusively, for the
purpose of creating solidarity, showing equality in terms of knowledge possession and management,
Such an inclusive use of we to refer more generally to 'all people' is found in Excerpts (56) and (57)
below.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

133

As Biber (2006:51-52) remarks, spoken university registers exhibit greater reliance on the precise
use of pronouns than written registers. Pronouns form one of the most important linguistic devices
speakers use to mark contexts of their utterances, to refer to different participants and help hearers to
fully interpret the discourse; linguistic devices referred to as deictic markers. Grundy (2000:27-31)
identifies three major types of deictic markers namely, personal, which are marked by personal
pronouns such as (I, you, we), spatial, which are marked by place adverbials such as (here, there),
and temporal, which are marked through adverbials of time such as (now, then). This study refers to
two of these categories, and will show, for example, that in context, the literal meanings of some of
these, can change (see the use of we to refer to the singular, or the use of now without a primary
time-related meaning). Even so, deictic markers such as the particular ones to be discussed here are
important in marking stance (cf. Jaffe, 2009; Biber, 2006).

4.3.4 Characterising specific pronouns as structural discourse markers

4.3.4.1 The pronoun you

In this section, I shall illustrate how lecturers use deictic markers, particularly personal pronouns, to
contextualise their utterances while facilitating interpretation by students. The following excerpts
illustrate how lecturers used the personal pronoun you in its three different functions, in the lectures.

(56)
1 That is why you see the world has experienced things like revolutions. Of
2 course you can as you read and get to know Thomas Hofs. You can come up
3 with other criticisms. I thought these are important for you to build on.
LPsc.3

The lecturer's use of you in excerpt (56) directly engages students in the lecture by reminding them
of political revolutions at different times in different parts of the world (line 1). He also invites the
students to develop their own views as they discover them through their reading (lines 2-3). He
concludes by indicating his stance and highlights what is important for the students regarding the
content he has presented (line 4). This practice points to an important issue of the choice and use of
the pronoun in a classroom setting. The lecturer seems to deliberately stimulate and engage students
into independent study and critical thinking by just giving them the basics 'I thought these are
important for you to build on'. Furthermore, the lecturer demonstrates his wish to help students
better understand the concepts they are studying.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

134

(57)
1 You remember when we were talking about alienation?
I know you have studied History, isn't it?
LSoc.1

In excerpt (57) the lecturer uses you to stimulate students' memory so that they can participate in the
discussion. He commits the students to materials that are familiar to them, thus engaging them by
referring to already given material as an introduction to the discussion of new material at hand. This
strategic choice and use of the pronoun is customarily done to engage the hearers directly, in this
case to instil in the students the habit of revising their lecture notes, linking ideas they learnt at lower
levels of the course, and critically relate them to the ideas they learn at university. After having
developed that habit, the students will discover that learning is a continuous process. This is likely to
facilitate their success in learning at tertiary level.

(58)
1 For those of you who missed the test on Friday morning,
2 you will meet on Sunday at 1 pm, that is where you will get the
3 directives from him … where you can do your test
LSoc.3

Excerpt (58) facilitates another important role of a lecturer, which is to maintain a good rapport with
students. The lecturer here recognises the fact that his duty is not only that of sharing knowledge
with students, but also of caring for their affairs as in making assessment arrangements. Students
who missed a test or assignment are directly addressed and informed of the alternative arrangements
that have been made for them. In this case, the you does not refer to all hearers, but to a selected
group within the class.

(59)
1 But I believe that you have also got to read a piece by Dahl.
2 Before you ask me a question, please dig deeper.
LPsc.4

Excerpt (59) resembles excerpt (58) in that both appear as illustrations of managerial uses of you.
However, excerpt (59) gives academic advice regarding students' own engagement with learning
material rather than logistical arrangements regarding another core academic activity, namely
assessment, that is, the one where students have to show their grasp of material outside of and after
the lectures. Here students are directly addressed to remind them of their own responsibility for their
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

135

learning, thus of what they should be doing outside of the classroom, specifically of building a
reading culture and through that, also improve critical thinking skills.

The three excerpts given above summarise the three common instances of the lecturers' use of you
to engage students (i) in content development, (ii) in linking to work formerly presented through
questioning, and (iii) in management of out-of-classroom academic activities. Excerpt (60)
demonstrates the predominant use of you for explanatory purposes. This usage occurred generically
in all lectures.

(60)
1 You cannot say I am very far from the United States, because you know what is going
2 on in the United States, in Egypt … you know everything; therefore geographical
3 distance is becoming irrelevant. Under globalisation people can make crucial decisions
4 even without coming into physical contact with each other. You can decide on public
5 policies. You can decide on economic issues without coming to each other physically.
6 That is because of information and communication technology. You don't need to go to
7 US to negotiate, to bargain about various economic issues or public issues. You can
8 negotiate while seated in Dar es Salaam with a person in Washington.
LPsc.2

Excerpt (60) illustrates how lecturers typically use the generic pronoun you to refer not to any
specific hearer, nor necessarily to the group in the class. In this case, the generic you is very similar
to the generic we (to be discussed below). It functions as a kind of place holder for any persons who
would "say they are far from the United States", "decide on public policies", "decide on economic
issues", "need to negotiate with partners in the US", and so on. Such generic use may facilitate topic
continuity and coherence through explanation and clarification. The lecturer is explaining the
pervasive influence of globalisation through the revolution in Information and Communication
Technology. Using the generic you, she explains what an individual can do today with such easy
access. The lecturer keeps students' attention, by drawing on their sense of humour (line 1, line 7-8),
and in doing so also keeps them focused on the topic while she continues it and maintains the
control of the flow of information. The repetition of the pronoun you here indirectly acts as a
cohesive device in this section of the discourse.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

136

4.3.4.2 The pronoun we

(61)
1 Today we will look at Max Weber on Religion. In the past lecture we were
2 introduced on some of the concepts that Weber used in his studies, and today
3 we want to broaden that spectrum so that we can be able to understand from his
4 perspective, what specifically is the role of religion in the development of
5 Western capitalism.
LSoc.3

The use of inclusive we in excerpt (61) does not only build common ground between the lecturer
and students, but it also facilitates topic development and coherence. The lecturer registers his
intention to share the topic with the students (line 1), and connects it to the previous topic (lines 1-
2). Then he talks about how they are going to handle the current topic in relation to the previous
(line 3) and goes on to mention the aim of the current meeting 'so that we can be able to understand
…' (lines 3-5). This use of we represents a marking of solidarity between lecturer and students
regarding the particular assignment for that lecture.

(62)
1 That is why we say that power is at the heart of politics. There is no politics
2 without power. Therefore, power is centre in political science. We study,
3 actually if you look at what we do in political science, we study issues related
4 to the acquisition of power.
Psc.4

While excerpt (61) uses generic we to demonstrate the lecturer's shared intention with students
regarding the current topic, excerpt (62) illustrates the use of the pronoun for indicating solidarity
with a scholarly community. The lecturer relates what they study in Political Science with power. In
using the pronoun we here he refers to political scientists generally. This includes the lecturer in the
community of scholars, and at the same time invites students to become part of that community of
practice.

The above two examples demonstrate how lecturers use the first person plural pronoun to express
shared activities and develop shared knowledge. Excerpt (63) illustrates how the lecturers use the
pronoun we generically in explaining an idea, facilitating topic continuity and cohesion.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

137

(63)
1 So the social self develops through an active process, an active process … through the
2 interactions we engage with people, and as I have mentioned, Charles Cooley, in his
3 concept of the looking glass self, we define and we value ourselves through the way we
4 think others see us It is as if we are looking in a mirror and we define ourselves in
5 function of how others view us.
LSoc.4

The generic use of we in excerpt (63) refers to people more generally. This is widely inclusive and
in reference to not only the lecturer and students who are present. The lecturer describes how the
social self facilitates the self as a general process. He talks about how human beings (we) participate
in the active process through interactions with people. He also describes how humans (we) define
themselves based on how others see them. This narration strategically involves students in the
construction of knowledge concerning the development of self.

4.3.4.3 The first person pronoun I

Table 4.2 indicates that the first person pronoun I was the third most frequently used pronoun (321
instances) out of 1373 total instances of personal pronouns under study. The pronoun occurred not
only when lecturers referred to themselves and their own duties in knowledge construction but also
when they talked about their own role in the scholarly project, as in excerpts (71), (72), and (73).

(64)
1 I would like to, I don't want to define it; sometimes concepts are not
2 definable, I will try.
LPSc.4

In the above excerpt, when asked to define the concept 'authority', the lecturer refers to the difficulty
of defining some academic concepts, not only because it is difficult for the lecturer (the speaker
himself), but because some concepts are abstract and complex. The secondary school practice of
defining every concept is indirectly challenged in this way.

Excerpt (64) above demonstrates the use of pronoun I in used in referring to the speaker, the lecturer
himself, when he is expressing his own responsibility in academic affairs. The following examples
illustrate how lecturers use such self-reference in expressing their personal knowledge (excerpt 65)
circumstances (excerpt 66) and (excerpt 67).

(65)
1 Recently we had people who believed that May 21st was the end of
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

138

2 the world. But I'm told they have postponed. It's going to be
3 October … We have churches, like in some churches … if you are
4 wearing suit, … then you get the front seat, I'm told,
5 I'm not sure, but that's what they say.
LPsc.3

Here the lecturer is topicalising some church practices and then interjects a comment referring to
himself (line 2) 'I'm told'. Such self-reference is part of giving information to which he cannot
commit himself so he claims to have received it from someone else. This strategic use of the
pronoun I helps him proceed with examples while expressing an element of doubt. In so doing, he
manages to continue with the topic while managing the class emotionally well.

(66)
1 It is like us, I am not a full professor. I am simple but I hold an office as
2 the Head of Department. There may be professors whatever, I don't care,
3 I am the boss, I have legal-rational authority.
LPsc.4

Here the lecturer uses his own circumstance to exemplify the meaning of "legal-rational authority".
By amusingly using himself as an excerpt, he is likely to attract students' attention to the topic,
helping them to understand the concept in question well. Such use of I could be fictive, in that even
if the speaker were not in fact the Head of Department, or even if he were actually a professor, he
could still use the pronoun "I" illustratively, to make the example more concrete for the hearers.

(67)
1 So, as a father or as a teacher here, I imagine, … I take the role of the others.
2 I imagine myself in the role of the other. I imagine myself, as I am in your role as
3 student role, listener in order to determine the criteria you will use to judge
4 my behaviour. So, I try to determine how these people look at me and surely they
5 consider me to be their lecturer and so on, and on the basis of that information,
6 I use that information as a guide for my actions. That is, I take my role, role
7 taking as young children in the process of growing up.
LSoc.4

As in excerpt (66), in excerpt (67), the lecturer refers to himself in highlighting his experience not
only as a teacher, but also as a father, to develop a topic. He tells the students how he feels when he
contemplates the concepts he is teaching in relation to his real life roles. This exposition, as it is
given in excerpt (67), again draws attention to the lecturer himself. His own position and reflection
is offered as an aide de memoire that is, to create a mental image of the way the lecturer exemplifies
it.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

139

4.4 SUMMARY

This chapter has presented and discussed the most notable discourse strategies that the lecturers who
participated in this study used during lecture sessions. The three most remarkable propositional
strategies are lecturer repetition, lecturer's use of questions, and lecturer's use of code switching
between English and Kiswahili. The findings indicate that lecturers use the two types of repetition to
achieve cohesion, topic continuity and emphasis. With regard to questioning, the findings indicate
that lecturers use four types of questioning strategies to check for comprehension, to stimulate
higher level thinking, to manage classroom behaviour as well as to encourage students' participation
and independent study. On the part of code switching, the findings indicate that lecturers use two
types of code switching to engage with students, to translate some concepts, to explain, to translate,
to manage students' behaviour and to advise or encourage students. Additionally, the chapter has
shown that lecturers use the strategies consciously considering the low level of English proficiency
among students. The chapter has also shown that lecturers are divided in relation to which language
between the rival two, English and Kiswahili should be LoI. Some believe that English is more
developed and entrenched than Kiswahili thus it should continue functioning as LoI while others
consider that Kiswahili should occupy a great position as a language of wider communication in
Tanzania.

Moreover, this chapter has demonstrated how lecturers use structural discourse strategies
generically in their classroom interaction. Generally the chapter has shown the relationship between
structural discourse strategies and propositional discourse strategies by showing that both work to
facilitate topic continuity and coherence. The chapter has demonstrated how discourse markers
function as cohesive devices, marking such textual functions as framing, linking and showing
consequential relationships. Specifically, the chapter has shown that lecturers use the discourse
markers so and now to achieve similar communicative goals as those achieved using propositional
strategies. For the case of so the chapter has shown that it is used to mark emphasis, elaboration of a
point and continuation of a topic while for the case of now, the chapter has shown that it is used for
drawing speaker's attention, for topicalising an idea, for progressing a topic progression, reiteration
and clarification.

The chapter has also shown how specific pronouns perform different functions. Particularly, the
data show that the pronoun you functions not only as an interactive device, but also as an
explanatory device of significance in classroom interaction. Its significance is noticeable in terms of
engaging students in the content, indicating lecturer's stance, inviting students' comments, directing
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

140

and advising students about their responsibility in the learning process. As for the use of the
pronoun we, the data show that it is not only a solidarity device, but, as with you, also a strong
explanatory device. Finally, at least in the lectures that were recorded, the data show that the
pronoun I marks different kinds of speaker information, such as speaker knowledge and his or her
stance about it, speaker's circumstance and speaker experience.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

141

Chapter Five

DISCUSSION AND REFLECTIONS

5.1 INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, I shall take further the discussion of the research findings presented in chapter four.
The discussion is organised to address the fourth fundamental objective that guided this study (cf.
section 1.3.2). The first three objectives of the study intended to assist in identifying, in terms of
propositional and structural strategies, the generic features of lectures taught in two of the large
Departments of the University of Dar es Salaam. This interest is not merely to describe what these
features are for the particular case studied here, but also to consider them as indicators of how large
group teaching in multilingual African communities is managed at tertiary level. These objectives
were addressed in chapter four.

Here the fourth objective, namely to consider the use of the most prominent strategies used in
lectures in terms of their likely functionality in facilitating learning, will be addressed. The various
fields of academic interest that would inform the research questions and objectives of this study
were presented in chapter two. It became clear that besides the analytic tools provided by
Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis (cf. sections 2.1 and 2.2), this study would
necessarily also entail consideration of relevant aspects of classroom interaction as a discourse type
(cf. section 2.4). Additionally, it would entail Bilingualism and Bilingual Education (cf. section 2.5)
as well as relevant aspects of educational uses of English as a Lingua Franca (cf. section 2.6). This
chapter will illustrate how the study relates to and can also contribute to the understanding of
classroom interaction in higher education in a multilingual community. It will also illustrate the
kinds of bilingualism (individual and social) that are operative in higher education in Tanzania,
particularly where English is the only recognised LoI.

Many scholars refer to the fact that higher education is currently experiencing rapid challenges that
call for urgent attention and action (Hénard, 2010; Fairclough, 2001). Universities today, like all
other sectors in society, are subject to change that is related to broader patterns of social change and
human interaction. This includes the fact that they have to respond to one of the buzzwords of
capitalist organisations, be it private business or public service, called 'quality' (Fairclough,
2001:30). Hénard (2010:4) associates these challenges with the role of universities in creating
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

142

employment and educating for specific professions in the increasingly knowledge driven global
economy, which demands skilled labour. This puts pressure on higher educational institutions to
produce appropriately skilled graduates. Moreover, as universities constantly compete for students
and funding, they are under the scrutiny of quality assurance agencies that audit teaching and
research, thus putting a new kind of pressure on institutions that were formerly elite organisations
that could develop knowledge for the sake of knowledge. This practical reality calls for a total
involvement from all levels of a university as an organisation. Individuals, departments, units
colleges, institutes, schools and the whole university inevitably play a concerted role in ensuring the
achievement of the university's goals and objectives because as Fairclough (2001:30) observes,
flexible organisations need flexible employees. Unfortunately, as Hénard (2010:4) argues, most of
the current evaluation of performance of universities concentrates more on research as a means of
ranking institutions while neglecting other factors such as classroom practices. In the following four
sections the findings of this research that were discussed in chapter four, will be related to
theoretical positions highlighted in the literature, that were discussed in chapter two. Finally, this
chapter will give an assessment of the status quo in large group teaching, and provide some pointers
as to the structuring of lectures in higher education that will clarify what the role and significance is
of attention to language in such a context.

5.2 BILINGUALISM AND BILINGUAL HIGHER EDUCATION

As noted earlier (cf. section 1.3) bilingualism, as a linguistic capacity of individuals and as an
identifying feature of communities, is a common phenomenon in many countries (cf. Corson,
1990:159). As has been pointed out, language is central to education because it functions as
the most prominent vehicle of all learning. García (2009:22) argues that this is even more
important to bear in mind in bilingual education because then learners are confronted with
more than one language as the learning vehicle and often more than one language is offered as
subject of study. García (2009:126) clearly distinguishes between, on the one hand, bilingual
education as a form of teaching and learning where many have to manage a dominant
language that is not their L1, as "learning vehicle" and, on the other hand, language
programmes in which a language may be taught to L1 or L2 learners of the particular
language.

Early learning through an L2 poses very specific difficulties for very large numbers of
children entering primary education worldwide, and these difficulties continue for many in
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

143

secondary education as well. Much smaller numbers of students in any community actually
progress to tertiary education. Furthermore, for a long time many people have held the
assumption that by the time learners are ready to enter tertiary education, they should possess
well-established language skills in the language of instruction and thus need no special
attention. Anecdotal evidence of learners who were able to master a new language required of
them on entry into a tertiary institution, abounds. However, systematic investigation of the
language practices of students (although not the focus of this study) as well as of lecturers
who need to use an L2 as LoI at tertiary level in African contexts is scarce. In attending to the
lecturing practices and perceptions of lecturers at the University of Dar es Salaam, this study
aims to contribute to the field of tertiary educational practices in bilingual and multilingual
communities.

Those at university level, who teach through medium of an L2 such as English, will
themselves have progressed through primary and secondary education in which their L1 was
phased out as LoI and their L2 (or L3) eventually became the LoI. Thus in climbing up the
academic ladder to become lecturers in tertiary education, they not only experienced use of an
L2 as LoI, but also in one way or another overcame difficulties that many students appear not
to have managed. This makes an investigation of their practices and perceptions informative.

Considering classroom practices, much of the approaches and techniques used in primary and
secondary classrooms apparently cross over to universities. For example, Mwinsheikhe
(2009:228-9) finds that teachers in Tanzanian secondary schools improvise and adopt four
coping strategies to overcome language-related learning barriers. These are code switching,
safe talk, negative reinforcement and teaching of English language skills. Where relevant to
the findings of this study, I shall refer to these in section 5.3 below. At undergraduate
university level, Chickering and Gamson (1987:3) suggest that lecturers should adopt
strategies that promote higher order thinking through tasks such as analysis, synthesis and
evaluation. Strategies like these are said to promote active learning. Scholars maintain that to
achieve such goals lecturers must possess knowledge of alternative techniques and strategies
for questioning and discussion, and must create a supportive intellectual and emotional
environment that encourages students to take risk (cf. Hughes & Schloss 1987; McKeachie et
al., 1986). In the discussion below, I shall consider how the findings of this study relate to the
suggestions of, among others, Chickering and Gamson.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

144

5.2.1 Bilingualism and Multilingualism in education in Tanzania

As explained in chapter one, Tanzania is among the most linguistically diversified countries in the
world with more than 120 languages used in the country at various levels. Nonetheless, apart
from Kiswahili, none of the indigenous languages has the opportunity of functioning as LoI in the
education system of the country. This phenomenon has triggered a heated debate among different
stakeholders as to why other local languages are not privileged to play the role of LoI, but also as
to why Kiswahili, the most popular lingua franca in Africa, does not have a full-fledged
opportunity as LoI in the entire education system of Tanzania. The question is why Kiswahili
does not at least have the same position as English in the post primary level education. This
debate has really exhausted a lot of energy from some stakeholders who argue in favour of
bilingual education in which both Kiswahili and English are developed as LoI. For example, as
cited earlier in chapter one (cf.1.1), Qorro (2009:58) describes the intricacy of the situation by
remarking that:

It is not easy to talk of new ideas when discussing the language-in-education or the language-of-instruction
issue, since for almost 50 years African countries such as Tanzania have been debating this issue, with the
debate almost going stale at times.

The above excerpt illustrates the awareness there is of the detrimental effects of neglecting the use
of a familiar language in education. Many stakeholders with sensitivity for linguistic rights have
expressed their concern about African countries forcing their citizens to learn through medium of
languages they have not mastered. For the case of Tanzania, deep concern about the educational
policies and practices has come from not only local researchers but also from outsiders. For
example, Brock-Utne (2010:636) points out that although most African countries, including
Tanzania, place the language-in-education policy at the core of their education and development
plans, very many education policies still do not explicitly consider the role of language. Brock-Utne
(2007:487) makes an important and intriguing observation based on an analysis of two bilingual
programmes run concurrently in English and Kiswahili in selected secondary schools in Tanzania.
The study questions the kind of aim that Tanzania has regarding appropriate education for the
labour force it wants to create for national development. The observation is that if Tanzania
continues with policies that favour the use of English in education, it is not developing people who
can contribute sensibly to the work force in a variety of sectors. She finds that both teachers and
students are battling with teaching and learning through English. If Tanzania aims to create a critical
and creative labour force, it should then rethink its language in education policy. The most
stimulating question that most African countries have to ponder concerns how they can succeed in
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

145

the endeavour to create an environment that will ensure the provision of education to all its citizens
in a language that will best serve all of the local population (Brock-Utne, 2001:115).

In the light of the foregone observations, it is useful to reflect on how a language that is familiar to
an individual can play a crucial role in providing an improved and focused educational experience,
also for students at tertiary institutions. At the same time, it should be kept in mind that, with the
demands of globalisation on education systems all over the world, it may be an unattainable goal to
try to replace one language-in-education with another. A practical measure would be to foster the -
coexistence of at least two languages, a local language such as Kiswahili and a global language such
as English as languages of instruction. In so doing, linguistic rights of a far greater number of
learners than otherwise can be attained. This would call for the acceptance of bilingualism in
education as a reality, as it has been illustrated in some contexts in South Africa (cf. Banda, 2007).
The following section highlights some advantages and disadvantages of the bilingual education
system.

5.2.2 Advantages and disadvantages of bilingualism

Recent research on language acquisition and language use in bilingual situations has indicated that
bilingual speakers are different to monolinguals in language development and in the nature of their
proficiencies. Emphasising the importance of learning, Bialystok (2011:229) remarks that through
the process of learning, all our experiences leave their mark on us. How we respond to future
situations is determined by similar experiences we came across in the past. Such patterns of
learning, also of learning languages, create knowledge in particular areas. In the case of bilinguals,
Bialystok (ibid.) maintains that bilinguals develop certain kinds of skills and knowledge through an
intense and sustained interaction with life circumstances. In language production bilinguals are said
to exhibit very slight, yet measurable time lags in such situation as selection of vocabulary items,
apparently because they have to select the linguistic items from two competing languages.
However, in most situations that can be objectively measured, bilinguals have an advantage of being
able to use two sources of language. This is manifested also in speakers' code switching practices.
Generally, bilinguals are credited for exhibiting higher creative skills (Hamers & Blanc, 2000),
being able to reflect on and manipulate language more adeptly (Bialystok, 2001), and being more
context sensitive (Cenoz, 2003) than their monolingual counterparts. In considering the language
use and general advantages in development of knowledge that fluent bilinguals have been found to
exhibit, one has to ask some pertinent questions. One such question would be whether an
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

146

educational system that suppresses the development and use of one (or more) of the languages that
bi- and multilingual speakers know, really works to the advantage of the students.

Research on linguistic and cognitive characteristics of bilinguals indicates that in certain domains
such as language acquisition, young language learners may be, at least temporarily, at a
disadvantage. For example, bilingual children are said to lag behind their monolingual counterparts
in the development of vocabulary in both languages (Bialystok et al., 2009; Oller et al., 2007).
Although some believe the deficit in the size and richness of vocabulary in young bilinguals is made
up in time, according to others such as Portocarrero et al. (2007), the limitations can continue into
adulthood. As adults, bilinguals are said to produce less articulate speech than monolinguals, and
their language use is allegedly characterised by imprecision and tardiness (cf. Gollan et al., 2005).
Both in general language acquisition and in developing vocabulary, the "handicaps" witnessed
among some bilinguals can be attributed to the constant choices that bilingual speakers make
subconsciously between the resources of one language and another, at times leading to verbal delays
and even confusion (Westly, 2012:39).

Although much work has been done in psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic research, which
indicates the features discussed above, it has to be emphasised that none of these have taken a
particular interest in the practices of adults teaching and learning in a higher education environment.
Thus, after considering the generic features of lectures as discursive type in a multilingual
community in this study, one needs to pose questions as to how received knowledge on how the
bilingual mind works, is integrated and sufficiently put to use in the form of the lectures as they are
currently structured.

Clearly, in the lectures themselves as well as in interviews with lecturers, there is both overt and
covert recognition of the multilingualism of participants in the educational process and of the
community as a whole. In Tanzania, at the University of Dar es Salaam, even with a language
policy that prescribes the use of English only as LoI, uses of more than one language in teaching and
learning are extant. Banda (2007) reports on one important study that examined how lecturers and
students used the different languages that they know at the University of the Western Cape.
Investigating peer mediated teaching and learning, the study revealed that tutors and lecturers who
shared a Xhosa/English repertoire with students, allowed the use of Xhosa in informal classroom
working sessions, but they used Xhosa neither during tutorials nor during consultations in their
office. This indicated that they were not utilising the multilingual advantage that, according to
received knowledge on learning where speakers have multiple linguistic resources, they should have
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

147

access to (Banda, 2007:6). Moreover, although students were allowed to write their tutorial work in
Xhosa, they still opted to write in English (ibid.). Banda (ibid.) explains this anomaly first with
reference to the fact that tutors and lecturers at university have been taught from the fourth school
year to operate primarily in English in doing academic work. They are said to find it difficult to
change such an established practice. Secondly, the current language policy and language planning in
South Africa still assigns English a status that intrigues students and tutors to the extent that they
feel doing academic exercises in English is a mark of academic superiority (Banda, 2007:7).
Extrapolating from this study, one needs to bear in mind that the already established position of
English as a global LoI, and as the language of higher education as the dominant language in many
other professional domains in Tanzania, will not easily be changed. Thus, possible advantages of
introducing the use of Kiswahili alongside English in a new form of bilingual education that
recognises the current multilingual practices officially may not necessarily materialise.

5.3 ENGLISH AS LANGUAGE OF INSTRUCTION IN TANZANIA

This study has been guided by the need to know what is happening in multilingual classrooms
in higher education in an African context. This cannot be done adequately without reflecting
on how lecturing links with the issue of English being used as a lingua franca in academic
settings. The issues of bilingualism and bilingual education worldwide are very often issues
that relate to the use of local languages that are in competition with English as LoI. Currently
in many parts of the world, higher education takes place in a context where neither lecturers
nor students are native speakers of English. This has a bearing on the way lecturers combine
skills from their other languages in teaching students who are also non-native speakers of the
LoI. In Tanzania, with a majority of people speaking more than two languages, the use of
English as LoI poses a great challenge. The major goal of this study was to establish how non-
native English speaking lecturers manage the delivery of lectures to almost all non-English
native speakers at university level.

Chapter two (cf. section 2.6) introduced the concept of 'lingua franca', the development of
English as global lingua franca, and particularly as a lingua franca in academic contexts and
in higher education. This study did not specifically set out to study aspects of ELF in lectures
in higher education in Tanzania. Therefore, only cursory remarks will be made here. Three
issues appear to stand out in considering the use of English in the recorded lectures, and will
briefly be discussed here. First, these recordings corroborate the point of departure of many
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

148

ELF studies, namely that the English used in lingua franca communication and in academic
discourse, does not completely fit a standard native form. Even so, there is no indication that
such 'new Englishes' prohibits successful communication in the particular context. Second,
the relatively extensive code switching between ELF and Kiswahili indicates an important
area for new research on ELF in African contexts. This is because in Anglophone Africa
English is primarily used to facilitate communication between nationals with different L1s
and to assure that besides the local advantages, learners are provided with a second language
that gives access to a globalising world and to international communication as well as in
academic discourses. Third, the specific propositional and structural discourse strategies that
were analysed in chapter four are themselves largely illustrations of ELF uses in the lectures.
This indicates that what has been identified as generic to large group lectures at the University
of Dar es Salaam has already incorporated critical aspects of ELF. The following two
examples illustrate how grammatical issues as well as features of Kiswahili, enter into the
lecturer's use of English thus creating another kind of world English.

Excerpt 68 illustrates an instance where the lecturer uses English, which reflects ELF features
some of which in the context of Tanzania, are features of Kiswahili expressed in English and
some are ordinary grammatical features typical to speakers of any foreign language.

(68)
Now, the concept of 'working class', the one I was saying. He's saying that the working
class is the necessary part of … of a nation but its members are not full members of the
political society.
(LPsc.3)

The underlined words in excerpt (68) imply an anomaly in the lecturer's use of verbs and articles.
Excerpt (69) provides one of the possible prescriptive versions of the same text.

(69)
Now, the concept of 'working class', the one I was talking about1. He argues2 that a
working class is a necessary part of a nation but its members are not full members of a
political society.
(LPsc.3)

The highlighted words in excerpt (69) illustrate how the lecturer draws equivalent linguistic forms
from Kiswahili and uses them in English. The verbs talking about1 and argues2 seem to mean the
same as the verb 'saying'. This can largely be explained by the fact that in Kiswahili the verb 'sema'
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

149

[say] can be used in both spoken and written registers across all domains of language use including
the academia. Nevertheless, although in the perspective of the notion 'Standard English' these
features seem ungrammatical, they are unlikely to hamper the delivery of content by the lecturer or
the understanding of the content by students.

Excerpt (70) illustrates how the findings of the study help explain the concept of world
Englishes. The lecturer draws expressions from Kiswahili oral tradition and uses them in
English thus creating a remarkably useful English blend.

(70)
When you see the country is peaceful or relatively peaceful, there is somebody who must
have done something. "Na ndiyo maana" [that is why] as a new generation,a young
generation, you should also aim at providing or trying to pay "mchango wako" [your
contribution] while you are living so that people who come after you, your children and
grand children, will also be able to say "ukiona vyaelea vyaundwa". Vimeundwa na babu
zetu, ambao ndio nyie" [when you see things afloat, they have been made, they have been
made by your forefathers, who are you!]
LPsc.3

In the above example, the lecturer freely switches from English to Kiswahili without any
attempt to translate assuming that all students understand or should understand Kiswahili. She
exercises her linguistic right to use a familiar language to ensure that she delivers the intend
content. As Mauranen, (2003:517) observes, educational practices should allow speakers of a
foreign language to comfortably speak it and there should be no attempts to set a Native
Speaker model for international users as this sounds both counterproductive and
unachievable. This practice also tallies with the recommendation made by McCarthy (2001)
for the need to identify other standards than 'native speakers' standards and work to identify
the criteria for English use in different cultural contexts.

5.4 THE LANGUAGE OF CLASSROOM INTERACTION IN LECTURES AS A


DISCOURSE TYPE

Lectures form one aspect of academic discourse genres. The generic frame of the lecture requires
speech turns and utterances of participants to be produced in a particular way. As Leftein and Snell
(2011:41) observe, genres are characterised by social and semiotic dimensions including the
thematic content, compositional structure, styles, lexical items, interactional roles and norms,
interpersonal relations and evaluative frames all of which form a rich ground for linguistic analysis.
As explained earlier in chapter two (cf. section 2.4), lecturers play several roles in the social activity
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

150

of teaching. Wragg (1999:5) introduces a list of five major roles of teachers, namely knowledge
transmission, counselling, social work, assessment and managing, which I apply here to lecturers.
As it is the case for other roles, the role of transmitting knowledge, as relates to lecturing, in some
cases can be influenced by contextual elements such as the shape and size of the class and venue as
well as the linguistic repertoire of participants. This can affect the style of teaching (for example
dictate a lecture method as opposed to a discussion method) in larger classes such as the targeted
ones in this study. It can also influence the kinds of materials selected (lecture notes, handouts,
white or chalkboard, overhead projector or power point) and how they are used. Specially, in the
context of large class size, which inhibits the possibility of using a wider range of teaching methods
that encourage active engagement of students, language becomes a primary tool in bridging possible
obstacles. Therefore, the role requires that lecturers carefully select and use discourse strategies that
facilitate teaching. Using the lecture method as it is at the University of Dar es Salaam, has
established generic patterns that can be identified and described; these can also be assessed for how
effective they are in transferring the kind of content that new social orders require of university
graduates. This situation of large student numbers, is among the factors that have determined the
continued use of the lecture method in higher education, not only in Tanzania but worldwide.

5.4.1 The lecture mode of instruction

The language of classroom interaction functions in various modes of instruction, among which the
lecture mode counts as one that is probably the longest established. Though currently facing much
criticism from humanistic, learner-centred teaching and learning theorists, the lecture method
remains the most popular mode of instruction, not only in Tanzania but also almost in all parts of the
world. It is the method that most people know, experienced themselves and therefore prefer in the
context where teaching involves large groups of learners. This is also motivated by limitations in
both human and material resources. As for the definition of the notion 'lecture' in the fields of social
sciences and education, the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (2009) defines it
at three levels. The first level relates to a lecture as a discourse on a particular subject given or read
to an audience, the second relates to it as a published text of such discourse, and the third relates to it
as a method of teaching by formal discourse. In this study, I combine the first and third definitions
with slight modification to refer to a lecture as "a method of teaching by formal discourse, read to a
class for instructional purposes".

While lecturing still holds a front position as a teaching strategy in higher education, its value is
contested in different ways. On the one hand, scholars like Dunkin (1983:75) positively argue,
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

151

"there is no doubt that students do learn from lectures, and that lecturing will continue to be a
common method in institutions of higher education". Soliman (1999:2), on the other hand, presents
the opposite opinion about the value of the lecture method of teaching by quoting a lecturer at the
University of New England saying, "I don't believe in lecturing. My Study Guide and Research
Materials are my inputs that take the place of lectures. I meet the students regularly for dialogue,
interaction, problem solving and question and answer sessions". Section 5.4.2 below presents a
discussion of some of the advantages and disadvantages of the lecture method of classroom
instruction as documented in the literature on modes of instruction. This will be related to findings
of the generic features of large group lectures at the University of Dar es Salaam (cf. chapter 4), for
assessment and critical evaluation.

5.4.2 Advantages and disadvantages of the lecture mode of instruction

Literature on teaching practices currently indicates that the disadvantages of big group lectures
outweigh the advantages. Nevertheless, as will be briefly pointed out in section 5.4.2.2, there is
research that has identified similar disadvantages for the teaching of small groups (cf. Mande,
2001). The reality at the University of Dar es Salaam, as is the case in many other African
universities and elsewhere in the world, is that teaching large groups of enrolled students in big
lectures is a general practice. Fundamentally, it is the default form of lecturer-student contact. The
practice continues due to many factors such as limited numbers of staff who have to teach large
numbers of students, limited infrastructure in terms of the number and size of venues, and limited
technological support in the form of facilities such as use of overhead projectors, data projectors and
online teaching facilities. Much of this can be related to the costliness of improving the
infrastructure, and limited funding for keeping up with the latest in technological development. In
response to the challenges posed by the situation explained above, lecturers have to improvise in
various ways to mitigate potential communication breakdowns. One of the means they apply in
these circumstances is to draw from their linguistic repertoires different verbal and nonverbal
discourse strategies that may assist in smooth delivery of the content at hand.

These strategies include those presented in chapter four, namely repetition, use of questions, code
switching, use of discourse markers and deictic markers, as well as explanation, demonstration and
use of the board. This section presents some discussion and reflections on the findings in the light of
the prevailing context in Tanzania. The discussion gives a reflection on the advantages and
disadvantages of the lecture mode of instruction, the factors accommodating the continued use of
this mode at the University of Dar es Salaam, and the lecturers' classroom practices in response to
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

152

the challenges emanating from these factors. The section further discusses some of the proposed
alternative modes of classroom instruction in the light of the findings of this study, and finally it
situates the findings of the study in the context of bilingualism in Tanzania and the use of English as
lingua franca in higher education. The framework for the discussion is the relationship between the
observed classroom practices on which lecturers rely and the contextual realities they have to
manage, such as the kinds of human and material resources that are available.

5.4.2.1 Advantages of the lecture mode of instruction

The desire of lecturers to cover a well-conceived syllabus poses a major challenge to them
(McKeatchie, 1997:67). The lecture method, which most lecturers resort to in order to cover as
much content as possible, has received both credit and criticism regarding its usefulness in
facilitating learning. The following sections highlight some of the observed advantages and
disadvantages.

Literature on the modes of classroom instruction indicates that the lecture method is valued for a
number of reasons. Soliman (1999:2) summarises some of the reasons that academics cite in favour
of the lecture method, namely enabling them to have a purposeful teaching, to project their
enthusiasm and to allow students to hear the thoughts of experts in the field. A very appealing
description of the set of advantages as far as this discussion is concerned, is the one presented by
USA (2012). Firstly, according to this guide, the lecture method is one of the most efficient methods
for the delivery of facts or ideas in a relatively short time, especially in contexts where the lecturer-
student ratio is high. Secondly, the method proves to be a necessary one for providing students with
important background information and prepares them for discussion. Thirdly, the method is useful
in supplementing materials by collecting and distributing information difficult to find in scattered
places such as textbooks, journals and tapes, resultantly highlighting pertinent materials and up to
date information. Lastly, the method facilitates the delivery of information to large numbers of
students from real subject experts. Since lecturers mostly speak from actual experiences and
scholarly analysis of findings, they can reinforce credibility and in a sense become mentors and role
models to students. Nonetheless, literature on classroom instructional modes also identifies some
disadvantages of the lecture mode of instruction as the following section explicates.

5.4.2.2 Disadvantages of the lecture mode of instruction

Despite being commended for facilitating classroom interaction in large group situations, the lecture
mode of instruction entails a number of disadvantages.One major setback of the lecture mode is its
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

153

reliance on the monologue style of knowledge delivery. Bakhtin (1984:110) observes that the style
grants the lecturer a dominant voice thus allowing him or her to seem as if s/he possesses a ready-
made truth. According to USA (2012), there are at least five notable disadvantages of the lecture
mode of instruction. Firstly, the method cannot suitably be applied in the teaching of practical skills
such as speech, cooperative thinking and motor skills. Secondly, the method can only conveniently
relate to developing skills on the comprehension level of cognition, and is limited in teaching more
practical cognitive skills (such as the development of concepts and principles). Thirdly, the method
denies the lecturer the opportunity to evaluate and establish what the students have actually learnt
before a new section is introduced, or before an examination. Fourthly, since the method limits
students' participation and mostly renders them passive, it may deter the lecturer from holding
students' attention. Lastly, the method is time and energy intensive on the part of the lecturer and it
requires speaking skills at an advanced level. With that background about the lecture method of
classroom instruction, the following section presents the characteristics of the lecture method with
reference to higher education in Tanzania.

Nevertheless, the lecture mode of instruction can become more communicative if lecturers can
adopt the dialogic style of instruction which, as Bakhtin (ibid.) remarks, facilitataes students’
participation, thus allowing the lecturer to build on students’ imput. Soliman (1999:7) suggests
several means by which lecturers can promote engagement and learning during a lecture. These
include use of vivid examples, use of humour to create interest and emotional release, use of
analogies, similes and metaphors to link new to known knowledge, and use of sign post statements
such as “Today I want to examine four principles of…”,. Others are the use of framing statements
such as “The basic principle underlying…is this.” Lastly is breaking the lecture after every 15
minutes with some activity such as letting students write down one or two questions they may have
had at a certain point in the lecture and instruct them to discuss with a neighbour.

5.4.3 The lecture mode of teaching in Higher Education in Tanzania

As noted earlier, although the lecture method prevails in higher education, it is perceived with a
certain degree of scepticism. Soliman (1999:5) observes that the method is accepted as a fact of
academic life by not only academics and administrators, but also by students. For example, in
Tanzania as it is in many other countries, the acceptance of the lecture method is already reflected in
the designation of academic staff where labels such as 'Assistant Lecturer', 'Lecturer' and 'Senior
Lecturer' are in practice.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

154

The lecturing method is predominant in higher education in Tanzania due to a number of factors.
The most notable is the pressure to increase the number of students in universities in response to
instructions from the education system to develop primary education through the Primary Education
Development Plan (PEDP) 2002-2006 and the Secondary Education Development Plan (SEDP)
2006 -2009. These two plans have led to an increased number of primary school leavers entering
secondary school and subsequently finding their way to the university. This has meant that the
universities have had to accommodate more students than before, although the infrastructure has not
developed in the same proportions. Political moves such as those that improved expectations of
access throughout in primary and secondary education,education have been criticised for their
failure to provide support in tertiary education, also in assisting with modification of the teaching
modes in universities.

Northege (2003:169) associates such a situation in higher education with the expansion programmes
that do not match with availability of funds. In the case of the University of Dar es Salaam where
this study was conducted, the situation is attributed to the IMF and World Bank imposed Structural
Adjustment Programmes that resulted in, among other things, trade liberalisation and finally
liberalisation of education. This liberalisation led to the mushrooming of privately owned schools
thus hiking the number of students with access to a university education even though the
infrastructure and financial capacity remained weak. As will be briefly pointed out here, large
student numbers and the constraints of the infrastructure oblige the lecture method, and therefore the
particular uses of language associated with such a genre.

Lecturing at the University of Dar es Salaam, like anywhere else, is challenging due to a number of
factors. Large classes are among the factors that assure the continued practice of the lecture method
at the University. For instance, the number of students in the studied departments ranged between
100 and 300 per course. This situation limits the use of any method of instruction other than the
lecture method. The issue of class size and how it influences learning and teaching in higher
education has engaged researchers in developing countries such as Tanzania as well as in developed
countries worldwide. In Australia, Markwell (2003:2) laments that the decline in the practice of
small group teaching in universities and the diminished opportunity for individual contact between
students and academics has posed a great challenge to the Australian prospect of having higher
education fit for the 21st century. This is apparently due to the worsening student-staff ratio. This has
been compounded by the dramatic rise in students' enrolment and intense market competition (cf.
McInnis, 2003:2ff). In the university sector of Ireland, it has been observed that large classes are a
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

155

common practice that is likely to persist in the future due to the ever increasing number of enrolled
students (Waddington and McCaffery , 2010).

The funding of the university does not tally with the expanded enrolment of students; therefore, the
university has resorted to using the few large lecture halls and theatres that they do have, to
accommodate the large numbers of students. These are associated with problems such as
inaudibility of the lecturer, especially in cases when the sound system is defective or at times when
the supply of electric power is down.

As explained above, the staff-student ratio at the University of Dar es Salaam is very high, thus
encouraging large group lectures. This situation militates against the possibility of dividing the large
classes into smaller, more manageable groups. Even if the number of lecturers increases, especially
after the return to work of all the members of staff who are currently training elsewhere, the limited
infrastructural capacity such as a limited number of large venues is likely to foster continued use of
the lecture method. Considering the inherent limitations of the large lecture in the transfer of extant
knowledge and the development of new knowledge, in the following sections I shall give some
reflection on the alternatives to such a genre in teaching.

5.4.4 Active learning as alternative mode of instruction in higher education

Recent reflection on the most effective forms of teaching mostly argues against the use of the lecture
method, and suggests models of instruction that promote active learning. In most cases the
suggested methods point towards having small class sizes that facilitate learner centred practices.
This trend is linked to the opportunities that new technologies offer for moving away from
traditional approaches to learning and teaching in higher education (cf. Allan et al., 2009; Field,
2004, McInnis, 2003; Saunders & Klemming, 2003). Thus, according to Gibbs (1981), lecturers can
enrich there lecturing methods by integrating resource materials and alternative modes of
communication with the conventional lecture methods to overcome some of the institutional
constraints. Markwell (2003) further suggests that universities should encourage teaching methods
that prompt active learning, such as discussion and debates that can improve independent and clear
communication skills. Other such active learning modes of teaching are the seminar method, the
case study method, and the tutorial method (Mande, 2001). The following sections provide an
overview of some of the alternatives suggested in the literature that can be used to enhance the
lecture methods already in use at the University of Dar es Salaam.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

156

5.4.4.1 Collaborative learning

In a study about university students' view on the good lecturer's classroom practices, Rego (2003)
found that students consider four major kinds of behaviour of lecturers necessary. These are
participatory modes such as encouraging students to participate in the teaching and learning process,
practical modes such as explaining points by using practical examples that are accessible to
students, modes of pedagogical conscientiousness such as the lecturer's professionalism, and modes
of courtesy such as showing respectful behaviour towards students.

It has been argued that focus should be on the learning outcome rather than on the teaching process
itself. Then lecturers and students collaborate for attaining quality learning. Markwell (2003:1)
observes that learners learn both from each other and from those who teach them, thus better
methods of teaching are those that promote active learning. Universities should thus encourage such
collaborative teaching methods that refine skills for independent thinking and clear communication.
Markwell (ibid.) presents some of the factors that play role in determining the quality of learning.
These factors fall into three major groups. The first set of features relate to qualities of the students
themselves, that is their aptitude, their approaches to learning, as well as the size and nature of their
classes and the quality and diversity of the group members. The second set of features relate to the
kind of curriculum being studied, the calibre and strategies of the lecturers and the way learning is
encouraged through assessment and feedback. The third set of features relates to the available and
used resources such as libraries, laboratories and Information Technology, the scope for learning in
classrooms and outside classrooms and the wider institutional and social contexts.

5.4.4.2 The Peer Assisted learning mode

The peer assisted learning mode (hence forth PAL) is well established in Great Britain and in the
United States of America, where it is referred to as supplemental instruction (cf. Capstick et al.,
2004). Boud et al. (1999:413) define PAL as the use of teaching and learning strategies in which
students learn with and from each other without the immediate intervention of a teacher. This mode
works to enhance students' learning experience by providing them with an opportunity to discuss
curriculum topics in a non-threatening environment (Hammond et al., 2010:202). The mode has
potential advantages to students and teachers as it facilitates retention and has been found to produce
improved grades (cf. Pakinson, 2004; Congos & Schoeps, 1998). Other benefits of the mode are that
it helps students to cope with university life and to understand the learning context better (Captick et
al., 2004). This mode is also associated with improved critical thinking skills (Finlay & Faulkner,
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

157

2005). Students' own view of peer teaching and learning practices indicate that the method is not
particularly appreciated (cf Hammond et al., 2012; Sim, 2003). Hammond et al. (2010:208) found
that students responded well to the social aspects of peer learning sessions, showing that they valued
hearing other people's perspectives, learning from others and being able to air their concerns.
However, they showed reservations as to the potential of this method in helping them understand
complex concepts and course expectations. Sim (2003) found that students rated the contribution of
peers to have made the least impression on their development of knowledge and skills. They
indicated that they had learnt more from tutors and lecturers.

5.4.4.3 The seminar mode

Another mode of classroom interaction in higher education is the seminar mode by which the
seminar facilitator or lecturer provides students with a topic in advance of their meeting. Students
then come to the seminar prepared to present their search results to the whole group. The seminar
group which meets periodically, is supposed to consist of fewer students than would be the case in a
lecture. Mande (2001) finds that the method is advantageous in that it allows students time to
examine the topic thoroughly and helps them to acquire improved synthesis, analytical, critical and
communication skills. Setbacks associated with the method are the possibility of students and tutors
not coming well prepared, thus rendering the seminar discussion dull. This method has a high
requirement for resources and there is minimal instruction. Such resources are dependent on good
funding and location of a suitable seminar venue thus, the necessary infrastructure is essential.

5.4.4.4 The discussion mode

The guided discussion mode forms another method of instruction under the active learning teaching
methods. According to Kelly and Stafford (1993), the method can be applied for both small and
large groups, and can take different formats. Four such formats are identified. First there is the
controlled group discussion format by which the lecturer introduces the topic and controls the
discussion while students make comments or ask questions. The second is the step-by-step format
by which the lecturer divides the topic into several segments and then alternates between the
presentation of the content and discussion while allowing students to comment or ask questions. The
third is the buzz-group discussion format by which the lecturer, at a certain point in the lecture, asks
students to turn to their neighbour for a few minutes to discuss their understanding of a problem or a
prepared question. The last is the snowball group format by which the lecturer asks students to
extend their buzz-groups by doubling the group size so that pairs form fours and fours form eights
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

158

and the large groups finally present back to the whole class in a plenary session thus allowing ideas
to unfold gradually. The advantages of this method include providing an opportunity to students for
personal and intellectual growth through the interaction between them and lecturers and among
themselves. This method allows for active learning at a high conceptual level as well for building
self-confidence and independence among students in managing their own learning. The difficulty of
this method is that teachers have to thoroughly plan for both the content for discussion as well as the
strategies to be used to attain the seminar set goals. This can sometimes be tasking to the lecturer in
terms of time and energy.

Generally, based on my experience as a lecturer at the University of Dar es Salaam, I can find that
no one mode of classroom interaction in higher education can suit all situations. For the case of
small group methods as discussed above, Mande (2001) makes it clear that they can by no means be
fully reliable as they depend on many circumstances. For example, they can deny the student the
chance to learn note-taking skills because of not using listening skills. They can encourage
dominance of the discussion by one student or a few who have prepared for the topic. They can be
disorganised because students may not wish to work with each other. They can be unproductive to
students as many do not take discussion seriously thus not caring about taking any notes; finally,
and they may lack lecturer's input as not all lecturers are comfortable with seminars or discussions.

5.4.4.5 The use of practical examples mode

The use of practical examples forms one of the most cherished strategies in the literature on the
methods that stimulate active learning. This mode, which highly relates to the findings of this study,
involves a number of practices that many other modes are likely to fail to execute. The strength of
the method resides in its reliance on the linguistic potential of the lecturer, which is the focus of this
study. As will be pointed out in section 5.5 below, the findings demonstrate how central language is
to teaching. According to Courter et al. (1996), students value it greatly because lecturers who
provide practical examples in their lectures to reinforce the links between theory and practice
facilitate their learning. The coexisting use of practical examples and theory simultaneously develop
a theoretical and practical base for students (Courter et al., 1996:1). Section 5.5.1-5 will provide
more clarification on how the method operates with examples from the current study.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

159

5.5 LECTURERS' CLASSROOM STRATEGIES IN TEACHING BIG GROUPS

Although literature on classroom interaction in higher education reiterates that large class size
inhibits active interaction, some practices can facilitate active learning regardless of class size (cf.
Field, 2004). The practice of engaging students in the teaching and learning process seems to be at
the top of the agenda in most institutions, although its implementation is constrained by a number of
factors. Baldwin (2010:164) notes some of the constraints, which include decreasing resources for
the provision of a good learning environment. Particularly, the idea of engaging students seems to
be prohibited by large lecture halls and a class size of five hundred and more students. Yet, this is a
common phenomenon in many parts of the world, and invariably this is portrayed as daunting for
the students as well as challenging to the lecturer (Baldwin, 2003:164).

Soliman (1999:5) finds that lecturing in such conditions is challenging even to experienced
academics, as it requires improvising and developing new lecturing skills. According to Bash
(2009), there are political, linguistic and pedagogical learning factors that impact on classroom
strategies. Examples of political barriers are the internationalised market of higher education and the
globalization of knowledge. These may oblige the use of a second or foreign language in education.
As linguistic barriers, De Vita (2000:170) identifies language-related factors, especially lexical and
phonological ones. As pedagogical barriers, De Vita (2000:173) finds that universities are teaching
ever greater and culturally diversified numbers of students. The teaching methods that previously
worked well now do not help most students: the lecture method that dominates is least suited to
students' learning. Furthermore, Barlow (2002:1) notes that in universities, knowledge of the style
and register of academic language is often taken for granted. Lecturers ignore the differing
backgrounds of students by regarding students to be equipped with understanding of appropriate
vocabulary and terminology from the outset. Therefore, some form of renovation of teaching
practices that may benefit learners in big group lectures should be encouraged.

In considering what kinds of new classroom practices would be helpful, there should be attention to
the kinds of practices that research identifies as most likely to be useful. The practices often referred
to, and specifically recognised in the recordings analysed for this study, include repetition, use of
questions, code switching, use of discourse markers and deictic markers. This is particularly so in
the context of English being used as lingua franca in academic settings worldwide, to see how they
can inform the current practices. Considering work on bilingual education that recognizes the range
of linguistic resources that are available in communities helps to identify the most useful strategies.
Bilingual education draws specifically on languages other than English that students bring to the
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

160

classroom. Such a form of education allows more use of those languages while at the same time
developing English as lingua franca in such a way that the multilingualism of the speakers is not
denied or repressed, but actually encouraged. Students and lecturers are allowed development of
their linguistic repertoire, thus enabling them to become society members who can contribute
meaningfully in a range of different linguistic and social contexts.

The following sections present reflections first on those strategies identified as generic to large
lectures in the data of this study (cf. sections 5.5.1 to 5.5.5). The set of reflections is on some
potential discourse strategies of a slightly different kind, which could be used in facilitating teaching
and learning in higher education in such a multilingual society such as Tanzania (cf. section 5.5.6). I
shall demonstrate how the lecturers who participated in this study improvise lecturing skills that
facilitate active learning regardless of the number of students and the size of the venue.

5.5.1 Use of questions

The ways in which lecturers generically used questions in the big group lectures studied at the
University of Dar es Salaam have been discussed quite extensively in chapter four (cf. sections 4.2.3
and 4.2.4). Overall, the findings of this study are that the lecturers' use of questions as a discourse
strategy is a kind of behaviour that all use quite regularly. Particularly, in the big groups the kinds of
questions are ones intended to engage students, to get them to reflect, but rarely to actually give a
long answer that will open a discussion. Tag questions, rhetorical questions and closed questions are
all typically used to elicit agreement with the proposition of the speaker. Open-ended questions,
which were according to their occurrence within the transcribed texts the least often used of all
question types, could perhaps allow students to differ from or engage critically with the lecturer.
However, the impression is that more often than not, open-ended questions were used to check
students' memory rather than to invite a new discussion.

Clearly, the constraints of the large venue explain most obviously, why these question modes are
used. For instance, the use of questions in Excerpts (8-18) illustrates how the lecturers improvise
different strategies to explain concepts that cannot be explained using other illustrative devices or
resources such as overhead projectors or data projectors with visual presentations.

5.5.2 Code switching

The ways in which lecturers generically used code switching in the big group lectures studied at the
University of Dar es Salaam have also been discussed extensively in chapter four (cf. section 4.2.5).
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

161

The findings of this study demonstrate the importance of recognising that regardless of the actual
policy about the use of English only as LoI at this university, bilingualism and multilingualism is the
norm among all participants, lecturers, students and other staff members. The study has also
emphasised that situations where classroom interaction is through a language other than the first
language of participants, is not an isolated one. Code switching is a regular and acceptable
phenomenon when speakers are proficient in more than one language. It is a communicative
practice widely used in most public domains in Tanzania, and the University of Dar es Salaam is no
exception here. This study has indicated that the L1 of staff and students, particularly also the local
lingua franca, Kiswahili, can form a valuable resource in teaching and learning. On careful
consideration of the excerpts discussed in chapter four, it is clear that code switching is most often
used to minimise social distance between lecturers and students, to give accessible illustrations and
to rearticulate complex insights in a more informal mode so as to assist students in building new
concepts and new forms of understanding. All the eight examples presented in chapter four (cf.
section 4.2.5) indicate that lecturers draw on their own bilingualism and relate to a language with
which the students are familiar, to facilitate classroom communication through code switching.
Essentially, this study proves how inseparable speakers are from their linguistic and cultural roots.
The code switching instances exemplified in this study conveys ideas in a manner that is
conventional in every other bilingual educational context.

I would suggest that the practices of code switching that already exist, should be investigated for the
positive contribution that they do make to the development of new knowledge, that teaching policy
perhaps be adjusted to provide for such good uses of code switching and bilingual education. This
can be done without undermining the value of also developing knowledge through medium of an
international lingua franca such as English, in a manner that allows wider access to information and
to other social contexts than would otherwise be possible.

5.5.3 Discourse markers

The ways in which lecturers generically used discourse markers in the big group lectures studied at
the University of Dar es Salaam have been discussed in detail in chapter four (cf. section 4.3.1 and
4.3.2). Particularly, the use of the discourse markers with the highest incidence in the recorded
lectures was analysed. Although, in some instances "so" and "now" are used so often and even
repetitively, it appears to be typical of spoken language where the speaker is virtually giving a
monologue. These markers often signal a transfer to a new topic and the introduction of a related or
new idea. They also mark pauses as part of rephrasing or emphasising. In all the examples
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

162

presented, lecturers use "so" and "now" to achieve cohesion in long stretches of discourse that need
various kinds of textual structuring to assist hearers in recognising the logical flow of an argument,
and in following the main points of the presentation. No matter how the lecture method of
instruction can be criticised, the role that language plays in the method is paramount. Even when a
lecturer uses power point, the explanation part will still be vital, thus requiring him or her to employ
a variety of linguistic devices to deliver the intended content clearly.

5.5.4 Pronouns

The ways in which lecturers generically used pronouns that refer to themselves as speakers or to the
students as hearers in the big group lectures studied at the University of Dar es Salaam have been
discussed in detail in chapter four (cf. section 4.3.3). It appeared that the uses of "I", "we" and "you"
by lecturers is in much the same way as they would be used in any other context where a speaker
intends to engage hearers. The engagement of hearers could be by lecturers identifying their own
position, by identifying who they are addressing, as well as by challenging hearers to put themselves
in the position of another, be it other persons currently related to what is being discussed, or persons
in history whose ideas are relevant to shaping the hearers own thoughts and positions.

As explained above, language plays a central role in lecture delivery regardless of whether it is an
"old style" lecture, or a more innovative approach that attracts active participation from the hearers.
For instance, the use of pronouns in the provided examples, as explained under section (4.3.3), is
very useful in indicating stance or ensuring that the relationship between lecturers and the content as
well as the students is clear enough to signal important points. One such typical example is excerpt
(8). The use of pronouns "I" and "we" facilitates a smooth explanation of the concept 'legal-rational
authority' by allowing the lecturer to signal different positions when he is a participant in the
example and when he is inviting students to contemplate with him.

5.5.5 Use of the black or white board

Although the use of the black or white board as a supportive device in teaching was not specifically
discussed, it needs specific mention, as this is the one part of the presentation in which the lecturer
uses written (as opposed to spoken) language in the lecture genre. Even with new technologies such
as the overhead projector or the data projector, the black or white board remains a widely used
resource in the big lecture hall. It is used supportively to emphasise concepts that are being
introduced and to give an indication of highlights that need special attention. In the interview
sessions all the lecturers commented that it is a very useful means of helping students identify not
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

163

only the concepts being introduced, but also the spelling of different concepts they learn, which is
also important because the LoI is an L2 to the majority of the students. Most important is the fact
that all lecturers argued that they use the strategy of writing while lecturing to assist students who
are unfamiliar with the English terminology because of being exposed to the large group lecture
method for the first time when they arrive at university.

The above discussions summarise findings of the analyses given in chapter four. In the following
section I shall refer to suggestions given in a handbook on "Strategies for Effective Teaching"
prepared by the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1995. The illustration involves use of practical
examples, which I found is related to and exemplified in the lectures I observed. The handbook
refers to more strategies, such as 'show and tell', 'case studies', 'guided design projects', open ended
labs', the flowchart technique', 'open ended quizzes', 'brainstorming', ‘question and answer’ method
and 'software'. I shall not discuss any of these, as they are not directly relevant to the recorded
lectures that this study has been investigating. However, I shall refer to use of practical examples or
analogy as a means of explanation, and I shall illustrate from the recorded lectures how each one of
the participant lecturers used analogy in their presentations.

5.5.6 Use of practical examples

Literature on good classroom practices by lecturers (cf. Rego, 2003; Sim, 2003) indicate that
students value lecturers who actively motivate and engage them in the learning process, who
communicate effectively, and who present the content in a systematic and orderly manner. Factors
such as these foster the continued use of the lecture method in higher education. Baldwin
(2003:165) is frank about it that although many institutions and stakeholders claim to embrace
modern ways of teaching in higher education, lectures remain at the heart of students' classroom
experience. According to the Wisconsin University Handbook for Teaching Assistants (1996), the
biggest challenge in teaching is to help students to learn. Therefore, it makes some very specific
suggestions as to how teachers or lecturers can link theory to practice. It suggests the use of practical
examples to assist students in connecting theory with applications. The main goal of giving practical
examples is to help students to understand new materials as well as to apply the acquired knowledge
to new situations. Accordingly, the handbook elaborates this suggestion by categorising illustrative
practical examples into those that help explain a theory and new concepts and those that help
illustrate the application of basic principles.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

164

The Wisconsin handbook introduces analogy the most useful tool for explaining and exemplifying
new concepts. This is done by providing a mental link between the new concept and an idea that the
students can easily envisage. One helpful example of analogy presented in the handbook refers to
the concept of the conservation of energy in a natural sciences course, explaining it in terms of
money in a bank. Three types of bank accounts are analogously compared to three types of energy.
A process assumed to be known to students, namely the different ways of depositing and
withdrawing money, is used to explain the different forms in which energy is transferred and saved.
I shall refer to the Wisconsin explanation of using analogy, to illustrate how, in the lectures that I
observed, lecturers made use of this explanatory strategy. The following eight kinds of practical
example will illustrate how, intuitively or decidedly, lecturers used analogy in their big group
teaching. This highlights another generic feature of the big group lecture at the University of Dar es
Salaam. For the illustrations here, I have taken one example from each lecture. The analogies used
here all occurred as components of one of the three most frequently used propositional discourse
strategies. These examples illustrate not only how practical examples are brought in to facilitate
learning; they also illustrate the strategies identified by the Wisconsin guide as brainstorming and
the question answer method.

⇒ The floating ship example

The following excerpt shows a lecturer's use of a famous Kiswahili saying to bring home the idea
that everything has a source, and that even something abstract like the peace students are
experiencing in the country has a source; it can be attributed to the effort someone before them has
put in.

(71)
L: Ukiona vyaelea. Ukiona vyanini? [If you see them afloat, if you see them doing what?]
SS: Vyaelea! [Afloat]
L: Ukiona vyaelea? [If you see them afloat?]
SS: Vimeundwa! [ They have been made!]
L: Na ukiona vimeundwa vyaelea! [ And if you see them made, they are afloat!]
L: Ukiona vyaelea, nini vyaelea? [ If you see them afloat, what are afloat?]
SS: [Silence]
L: If you see the boat … in literal translation you know, there is something--Somebody who
has made it. Now you see Tanzania - You call it Tanganyika. When you see the country
is peaceful or relatively peaceful, there is somebody who must have done something. "Na
ndiyo maana" [that is why] as a new generation - a young generation, you should also
aim at providing or trying to pay "mchango wako" [your contribution] while you are
living so that people who come after you - your children and grand children, will also be
able to say "ukiona vyaelea vyaundwa". "Vimeundwa na babu zetu, ambao ndio nyie"
[when you see them afloat, they have been made, they have been made by our
forefathers, who are you!].
LPsc.1
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

165

In this excerpt, the lecturer appeals to students' knowledge of the idiomatic expression, wanting to
explain that current good conditions are the result of the hard work of previous leaders, of African
freedom fighters such as Kwame Nkrumah and Julius Nyerere. This is not only about political
history, but also an encouragement for the students to follow such an example. So, by using the
expression the lecturer compares the peaceful Tanzania to a floating boat; the "makers" of the boat
are Nkrumah and Nyerere, and the concept of cause and effect in the historical-political processes of
achieving liberation after colonialism is so explained.

⇒ The common river example

The following excerpt is a second example from the Political Science lectures in which the concept
of 'globalisation' and how some states profit more from this process than others, is brought home to
students. Using the metaphor of the "global village" to explain that the world has effectively become
a smaller place where people meet easily and should be able to share more easily than otherwise, the
lecturer elaborates and introduces the idea of a river flowing by the village. The lecturer uses the
image of a river from which theoretically every member of the village should draw water in equal
measure, to challenge the universal advantages globalisation is said to have.

(72)
… the countries that benefit through globalisation are the core countries, the core countries
including USA, European countries, at least even in the semi, periphery there is the so called
semi periphery countries such as Japan and India, they are benefiting from globalisation, but
what about Tanzania? Are we benefiting as USA? And therefore the question of global village,
who are the members of the global village? Do they access resources equally? As in your
home? Because you can have just one river "kila mmoja anaenda anachota palepale, sindiyo?
[Everyone goes and draws water from it, is it not?] Now, in the global village, can you do the
same? Can you get the same amount of water? That are the questions that you need to address
as you are seated with your friends, your fellows, as you go - the global village and its impacts
to periphery states
(LPsc.2)

⇒ The hen and egg example

In the following excerpt, the lecturer uses well-known argument often used in controversies about
what the cause and what the effect is in a given situation. He is working with the concepts of 'ideas'
and 'material conditions', referring to the Marxist question whether people first think about a
condition and then create it, or whether the material conditions are first, ant then prompt ideas about
the condition. As this is a rather abstract kind of argument, he refers first to the old question that has
no answer, namely whether the chicken was before the egg, or vice versa. He elaborates this
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

166

illustration by referring to how hot weather prompted the introduction of fans and air conditioners
(where what came first is clear). Finally, moving closer to the 'material conditions' concept, he refers
to the notion of a shirt, asking whether there were shirts before people started conceptualising
varieties of shirts, or whether the idea of a shirt came first, and only then the manufacturing started.
So, by a reduction of what is material to the concept of a shirt, which all students know, the position
Marx took, is explained.

(73)
So, that is actually a major contribution in sociological thinking. We ask what is it, what is it
primary, is it idea or material condition? … Let's say what was primary in understanding for
example the issue of the universe. What was what was there first? Is like thinking of a chicken
and hen and an egg. What was it primary? Is it chicken or egg? So, to Marx actually what was
primary is the material condition. That material condition, I mean, existing material condition
leads people to think something. For example, I will give you an example of weather for
example. Because of warm weather, for example, warm weather in Dar es Salaam, it is very
warm, very warm! So, people have started thinking of ways to at least be happy by introducing
air conditioners and fans and whatever so that the people can be happy. So, the idea of fan or air
condition came after the weather. Do you understand what I 'm talking? So, if I ask you for
example, what was it primary between the idea of having a shirt and a shirt? ...
LSoc.1

⇒ The vendor versus Bill Gates example

In the following excerpt, the lecturer uses references to common vending practices in Tanzania in
explaining and exemplifying the difference between a capitalist and a survivor. To distinguish
between those who amass wealth to take care of their basic needs and those who do so in excess of
their basic needs, he refers to two opposite players in business. First, he refers to the difference
between small concerns such as the Tanzanian street or market vendors and large concerns such as
international companies operative in Tanzania, such as Coca-Cola and Toyota. Second, he relies on
the students' existing knowledge of the owner of another such international concern, namely Bill
Gates who is the owner of the Microsoft Company and on their ability to recognise the difference
between him and the regular vendor in order to bring home aspects of Weber's concept of
'capitalism'.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

167

(74)
Well in normal circumstances people accumulate wealth ... you have people who have small
businesses, they are selling water they are selling in Ubungo or people are vending they are
doing small business in terms of vending … they have, let's say, ten cloths they move from one
corner of Dar es salaam to the other to sell, but at the same time we have people who have, let's
say, industries they own, industries worth of millions of money. All these people are
accumulating … but actually we can say a person who is vending … he is accumulating the
kind of wealth to make him survive … But a person who owns an industry, let's say Coca-Cola,
or he owns an industry, let's say Toyota, he does not accumulate capital for basic needs, he is
accumulating capital beyond his personal needs. In this context Weber is talking of
accumulation beyond personal needs. So, a person who has a business worth, let's say of 100
USD, we cannot call him or her a capitalist … is a person who shows the characteristics of
capitalism. But take an example of person who has 20,000 USD, we can say this is a capitalist
because this kind of money is beyond his personal requirements. So, a person like Bill Gates can
be termed a capitalist because even if he was to expend that money ... even if he was to use that
money for food, he could perhaps spend hundred years before being able to finish that money.
But a person like … a person like a food vendor at your cafeteria … he can actually spend that
money in a week and then it is over.
LSoc.3

⇒ The man to thing relationship example

In the following excerpt, the lecturer uses an elaborated example of how the owner, driver and
conductor of a commuter bus are related to one another through ownership of the "daladala" and
agreements about managing the commuter business they jointly operate, as an analogy that
demonstrates how materialistic power relationships exist in society.

(75)
Remember last time when we were discussing the owner of the "daladala" [commuter bus] and
we cited an example of one of you who is attending this particular lecture … and who is
therefore unable to drive his "daladala" [commuter bus] to commute people, passengers from
Ubungo to Manzese or whatever area and we said that he being the owner of the "daladala"
[commuter bus] he controls two things at the same time. He controls the thing itself, that is the
"gari" [car] ... the "daladala" [commuter bus] … but at the same time, simultaneously, he
controls these particular two men, the driver as well as the konda [conductor]. So, there is a
relationship between this particular owner and the "konda" [conductor] as well as the driver.
The owner is the individual person. These particular two individual (conductor and driver) are
also individuals but this particular relationship between the owner and the driver and the
"konda" is mediated through the inanimate thing "haiwezi kuona"[it cannot see] "haiwezi
kusikia" [it cannot hear] called "hii gari" … [this car]. So this particular relationship between
these two sets of individuals is mediated by inanimate thing called "gari" [car]. So through
"gari" [car] this particular power of these particular individuals is mediated, influences or
determines whatever activities of these particular two individuals.
LSoc.2
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

168

⇒ The drinking of culture example

The following excerpt illustrates how the lecturer uses a metaphoric reference to the activity of
drinking to articulate one way in which people acquire culture. In explaining the abstract and
variously defined concept 'culture', he mentions a list of what he regards to be components of culture
(values, norms, etc.) and collectively refers to them as "a code for behaviour". Regarding the
acquisition of this code, he refers to the fact that some see it as a process that people not only
passively receive, but in fact 'take in' unquestionlingly, like drinking something that will become
part of them without them putting in any more conscious effort than swallowing it.

(76)
So, in the process for growing up, humans get inculcated into a particular code of conduct, or
are exposed to a variety of values, norms, morals, conceptions, meanings, evaluations - a code
for behaviour. So culture as a code for behaviour. The process of growing up for some is
considered, it is considered as a process of enculturation. Some view this process of
enculturation as more passive. They tend to see it as a passive process, through which people
learn to execute different rules or actions for … the code of conduct. Some view it as a passive
process through which they acquire a culture, which is viewed as consistent, coherent, definite
and so, in the process of growing up, people acquire a culture. "Wanakunywa ile" [they drink
that] culture as a process, as a passive process …
LSoc.4

⇒ The corrupting of elections results

The following excerpt illustrates how the lecturer refers to elections for a student leadership that are
in process at the time of the lecture, to elaborate the concept that human beings are naturally egoistic
and selfish. He analogically uses the student elections in which students themselves are engaged, to
bring home a point that the social scientist, Thomas Hofs, has made.

(77)
… if I ask you now like how many people in this class are selfish, it's likely that no one is going
to raise their hands, uwongo?[is it a lie?]. Who is selfish, who is nasty, who is egoistic? These
are things that we are … I mean, we don't like to be associated with but we know deep inside
that it's how we are. Elections are over? … And what is the fate of our … friend, he won? Or
you are still in the, "au bado mnachakachua? Ameshinda?" [or you still corrupting the results …
has he won?] … he is about to win? … alright! So, Thomas Hofs is credited for having that
courage, you know, to speak about human nature. Things which … people would not like to
hear, as I said no one would like to be associated with this kind of aah, but we know deep inside
that this is how human beings …
LPsc.3
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

169

⇒ The boss versus rank example

The following excerpt illustrates how a lecturer uses his own position to explain the concept of
power related to a position and not to the individual who at a given time fills that position. He
intends to explain that there is power in the abstract position of the presidency, the position of a
Head of Government, which stays the same (constitutionally) even if the individual is not going to
be the same person indefinitely. He uses the analogy of the Head of a Department at the University
to explain how the President as Head of State is invested with "legal rational authority". He explains
this very specifically by telling students that even a person who according to one category is not in
the most powerful position (lecturer as opposed to full professor), can simply by being in a position
with "legal rational power", become powerful.

(78)
It is like us, I am not a full professor. I am simple but I hold an office as the head of department.
There may be professors, whatever, I don't care, I am the boss, I have legal-rational authority
(uproar). It is not much to be proud of but I am trying to explain the legal-rational authority. J.K
may be simple, wearing a smiling face all the time but he has the legal-rational authority. But
there may be the Mengis 8 with a lot of money. There may be the Manjis with a lot of money, a
lot of cars, they have a lot of what, but they don't have the legal-rational authority. He is the
president. We are not looking at Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete as an individual, as a personality, we
are looking at him as the president, office holder, holding an office of the president … the
presidency! We are looking at the individual as a position, he holding that office. Is that ok?
LPsc.4

5.6 CONCLUSION

This chapter has demonstrated how the lecturers of the University of Dar es Salaam improvise
different strategies to facilitate teaching and learning. The chapter has shown how, in the light of
other suggested modes of instruction, the lecture methods can still hold a dominant position in
teaching large classes. The findings show that there are some concepts and ideas only the lecture
method can suitably handle. A special issue concerns the influence of English as lingua franca and
the way the lecturers manoeuvre around it by careful use of such devices as repetition, questioning,
code switching, discourse markers and indexicals. In the light of these observations, it is suggested
that the lecture method should be regarded as effective as any other method of instruction. The only
issue should be on how to apply the insights from different studies and models for a common
classroom practice model that can cater for such situations as bilingual classroom settings.

8
Mengi and Manji are renowned business people in Tanzania.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

170

Chapter Six

CONCLUSION, SUMMARY
AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 INTRODUCTION

This study sought to explore, from the lecturer's perspective, the language of classroom interaction
in higher education in Tanzania. It particularly focussed on such lecturers' use of discourse strategies
during classroom interaction with students. The recorded data of lectures and of interviews was
transcribed and analysed within the framework of four questions. A literature review confirmed that
although there has been extensive research on which languages are used in classroom interaction in
Tanzania, the generic features and functions of the language of lectures as a vehicle for teaching and
learning have remained relatively unexplored. This exploratory study has identified the nature and
form of spoken discourse in university classrooms with large student numbers in Tanzania, the
reasons and motivation for particular kinds of adjustment through the use of verbal strategies such
as repetition, use of questions, code switching, discourse markers and pronouns to facilitate the
execution of the academic gaols of teaching. The study also sought to ascertain how lecturers view
not only their own practices generally, but also the challenges facing students' who are learning
through English, and how the lecturers attend to those challenges to help students. It further sought
to gain lecturers' opinion with regard to the choices they are obliged to make between English and
Kiswahili as languages of instruction.

6.2 DATA

Data were collected and processed in accordance with the study's aim presented in chapter one of
this dissertation. That aim was to identify the discourse strategies that the lecturers of the University
of Dar es Salaam use during classroom interaction, in order to categorise and map them according to
their occurrence and functional patterns, and to characterise them in the context of a bilingual
tertiary level education setting. Three fundamental objectives that guided the study were to identify
and describe the discourse strategies, to explain how and how widely and why the lecturers use the
various strategies that were evident during classroom interaction. The third question was to map the
lecturer's discursive strategies into an occurrence pattern that can function as reference in indicating
which strategies occur systematically in classroom interaction in a multilingual educational system.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

171

The objectives were accomplished and the findings demonstrated how lecturers in multilingual
educational settings utilise linguistic resources available to them to facilitate classroom interaction.

There were two sources of data, namely eight lectures and eight interviews. The lecture data were
processed under two major categories namely propositional and structural discourse strategies. The
analysis of propositional discourse strategies focussed on lecturer's use of repetition, use of
questions and code switching. The analysis of structural discourse strategies focused on discourse
markers so and now and on three personal pronouns, which were you, we, and I. The interviews
with staff members recorded after their lectures provided complementary information to the one
obtained from the lectures. They particularly gave information about lecturer's classroom
experiences as far as English as LoI is concerned, discourse strategies which lecturers profess to use
to facilitate teaching apart from those observed in the data, the reasons for their use of the various
strategies, their view about the usefulness of the strategies they use, and their additional comments.

The study referred to literature on discourse strategies in classroom interaction elsewhere to relate to
the identified discourse strategies that the lecturers of the University of Dar es Salaam use during
classroom interaction. Specifically, the targeted studies to which this project referred were those on
the discourse strategies typically used in classroom interaction in general and various studies on
classroom interaction in linguistically diverse communities. It has to be noted that considerably
more research has been done on strategies used in primary and secondary teaching than in tertiary
teaching. Special consideration was given to strategies speakers use for smooth communication
where speakers from different first language communities and with limited shared communicative
resources are in contact.

6.3 THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The study combined some insights from Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis
frameworks in order to cover sufficient nuances of the characteristics of lecturers' classroom
practices at the University of Dar es Salaam. Both analytic frameworks proved useful in that
Conversation Analysis supported in analysing conversational features of lectures and Discourse
Analysis assisted in analysing the discursive features of lectures. The focus was on the language of
classroom interaction as an instance of a particular discourse type, and the aim was to characterise it
in the light of bilingualism and bilingual education concepts in the context of higher education
teaching and learning in Tanzania. The study briefly considered the potential properties of the
lecturers' use of English as members of the outer cycle in Kachru's famous inner and outer cycle
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

172

model of English usage. Thus the study considered the LoI used in Dar es Salaam as an instance of
a "new English". The findings reflect the characteristic use of English as lingua franca in academic
settings thus forming part of world Englishes, particularly in the higher education system of such a
multilingual society as Tanzania. It was noted that as an international language used to bridge
linguistic differences, the English used in higher education in Tanzania shows marked differences to
the documented uses of English in higher education in European countries.

The analysis followed a bottom-up approach to avoid imposing theoretical predispositions on the
data. This approach demonstrated how lectures share certain characteristics with ordinary talk.
Through the analysis of the oral communication practices of lecturers, conversation analysis
revealed how the lecturers organise the communicative events and the roles of the different
strategies in wider social processes. The two branches of conversation analysis (formal and applied)
were especially useful in the analysis of the data. Particularly Pure Conversation Analysis
framework facilitated the identification and analysis of aspects of spoken English such as repetition,
questioning styles and code switching. Additionally, by drawing on the insights of Applied
Conversation Analysis, the study scrutinised oral practices such as code switching in the social
context of the Tanzanian higher education classroom interaction policy that requires all academic
discourse to be through the English medium. Examined against this policy, lecturers' practices of
code switching convey a significant message regarding the contradiction between policy on LoI and
actual classroom practice. For example, the study revealed that lecturers used the strategies
consciously as a response to the perceived problems that English poses to students when they attend
lectures delivered in the official language of academia.

These findings help reveal how participants in their practical contexts do things the way they do,
even when contrary to how the things are planned, evaluated and accounted for elsewhere in theory
or at a higher hierarchical level in an organisation (cf. Heap, 1990). Furthermore, this theoretical
approach helped the researcher to distance himself from practical or accidental personal interests of
various lecturers by conducting the interviews after the lectures and then based on the data in the
recordings, thus focussing the questions on the actual instances of the lecturers' classroom practices.
Thus, the use of video and audio recordings of institutional practices was crucial especially when
dealing with data that can reveal undesirable results that may call for social reaction.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

173

6.4 FINDINGS

Specifically the data reveals that lecturers rely heavily on repetition, questioning and code
switching. These strategies play a remarkable role in facilitating speech production and
comprehension. Moreover, the study reveals that lecturers generically utilise features of spoken
language such as discourse markers. These are acknowledged for facilitating smooth face-to-face
communication by helping in discourse organisation, content flow and signalling of how speech acts
are meant to be taken.

Discourse Analysis provided a framework for analysing different properties and patterns of
language that emerged from the lectures. It helped analyse how lecturers use discourse strategies to
produce different patterns of text. It specifically helped reveal how lecturers' uses of repetition,
questions and code switching as well as discourse markers and pronouns, creates coherence and
facilitates topic progression. The study used the Discourse Analysis framework as a master frame
for analysing the pragmatic and conversational elements of language in use in a university
classroom. With its interest in the structure of discourse in interaction, Discourse Analysis helped
relate different discourse strategies with different acts in the context of different cultural values and
roles that university lecturers play. The lecturers used different discourse strategies to not only make
discourse coherent and topics prominent and continuous, but also to fulfill pertinent academic roles
through their use in exemplifying, explaining, eliciting, and emphasising. These strategies were used
in the social roles of lecturers as well, as when they were advising, reminding, or even warning
students about their intellectual responsibilities and engagement with the content.

Generally, Discourse Analysis helped produce discourse data through guiding the researcher's
listening to talk, transcribing it and reflecting on its meaning and significance. The use of Discourse
Analysis facilitated an understanding of oral practices of lecturers during classroom interaction with
the inclination that so people's talk can provide evidence about other aspects of their life. Thus, this
study has discovered the interactional practices of lecturers and it has established how they utilise
their linguistic repertoire to accomplish the academic activity of lecturing. Generally, the analysis
has made explicit lecturers' classroom behaviours that for long time seemed to be inconspicuous and
probably not likely to attract any linguistic scrutiny.

The main findings are given after the analyses in the summaries at the end of chapters four and five.
Here I summarise the main findings in accordance with the three major questions, which are:
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

174

• What discourse strategies do lecturers use during classroom interaction?

• How do the lecturers use these strategies?

• Why do they use these strategies?

With regard to the first question, the study identified three major types of strategies that the
lecturers used namely propositional discourse strategies (repetition, questioning and code
switching), connectivity discourse markers (so, and now), and contextual personal markers
(pronouns you, we and I).

With regard to the second question, the study revealed that the lecturers used the strategies in a
wide variety of forms. For repetition, there were two types, namely phrasal and clausal
repetition. Phrasal repetition was on factual and action concepts, thus mainly noun phrases and
verb phrases were repeated, while the clausal repetitions were mostly of independent clauses,
which functionally play a great role in drawing the listener's attention, thus facilitating
comprehension.

With regard to the third question, the lecturers provided reasons for using the strategies
identified in the recorded lectures. The common reason they gave was their awareness of the
non-native English language proficiency of students, as well as the fact that first year students
are new to the register typically used in university lectures, thus needing more careful
consideration from the lecturers than when they are teaching more advanced students. The study
reveals that the lecturers use the strategies believing that they help to simplify their lecture
delivery. Concerning their views towards the language of instruction in higher learning, three
out of eight lecturers suggested that English should be maintained as the single LoI, provided
that it is taught well in lower levels, i.e. in secondary schooling. Four lecturers were on the side
of Kiswahili with the feeling of having a local language being used to impart knowledge, thus
reflecting nationalism. One lecturer was ambivalent, claiming that neither language would bring
better results if stakeholders were not actively involved in creating an environment conducive to
adequate mastering of both languages.

6.5 POLICY IMPLICATIONS

The study has indicated how the lecturers draw on their bilingual status to enrich lectures.
Specifically, the study indicates that they use code switching across all the three most frequently
used propositional strategies. They code switch when they repeat concepts and when they ask
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

175

questions. They also code switch for specific purposes of translating or explaining concepts,
managing classroom behaviour and showing solidarity with students. This study has shown
how, as it is for many countries in which English is not the first language of the majority of the
learners, lecturers in Tanzania use it in higher education teaching. It has become clear that there
is a need for continued investigation of how non-native speakers of English of varying levels of
proficiency are able to arrive at mutual understanding of academic work in this medium.

6.6 RECOMMENDATIONS

This study focussed on only one college and two departments on the main campus of the
University of Dar es Salaam. The results cannot be generalised to be applicable for all the other
campuses, nor for all the universities and tertiary institutions in the country. Therefore, follow-
up studies that include different institutions and fields are advised, with a view to accomplish
documentation of a wider spectrum of lecturers' classroom language practices in the country.
Moreover, the analysis in this study focussed on the uses of the numerically most used
discoursive strategies, namely on the three propositional markers, two discourse markers and
three pronouns. These are not representative enough given the wide range of language
properties that one does find in lectures. Therefore, it is recommended that more studies
focussing on other markers of this discourse type be conducted to avail information concerning
the variety of discourse strategies lecturers use.

6.7 CONCLUSION

This study attempted to isolate a number of generic features of lectures at the University of Dar
es Salaam. Two characterising features were established as the fact that this is an institution
where a majority of the staff and students are multilingual who are likely to be proficient in at
least three languages, namely in their local community language, in Kiswahili and in English.
Another feature was the fact that in the higher education system of Tanzania English is the
academic lingua franca, which is not only the default LoI, but in fact is the prescribed LoI. This
study has discussed how existing research on bi- or multilingualism and bilingual education can
facilitate reflection on how the lecturers of the University of Dar es Salaam manage big group
lectures, using a variety of strategies to facilitate teaching and learning. Furthermore, it has
highlighted some of the pertinent aspects emerging from ELF research that are interesting
regarding ELF teaching at the University of Dar es Salaam.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

176

In spite of a popular and quite widely distributed perception about poor performance of both
teachers and learners in theoretical and policy debates, classroom language practically shows
that it can provide some solutions to mitigate potential obstacles to teaching and learning in a
multilingual society. The practices analysed in this study call for closer scrutiny of practical
issues of English language usage in the Tanzanian context, as an instance of the uses of English
in higher education elsewhere in the world where English is not an L1, but a lingua franca to the
majority of the participants.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

177

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abercrombie, D. 1965. Studies in Phonetics and Linguistics. London: OUP.Aito, E. 2005. National
and Official Languages in Nigeria: Reflections on Linguistic Interference and the Impact of
Language Policy and Politics on Minority Languages. Paper presented at the Proceedings of
the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism, Somerville, MA.

Allan, J., Clarke, K. & Jopling, M. 2009. Effective teaching in higher education: Perceptions of first
year undergraduate students. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher
Education, 21(3):362-372.

Allen, S.E.M. 2000. A discourse-pragmatic explanation for argument representation in child


Inuktitut. Linguistics, 38(3):483-521.

Allwood, J., Nivre, J. & Ahlsén, E. 1990. Speech management on the non-written life of speech.
Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 13(1):1-45.

Altmayer, C. 2009. Instrumente für die empirische Erforschung kultureller Lernprozesse im


Kontext von Deutsch als Fremdsprache. In A. Hu & M. Byram (eds.). Interkulturelle
Kompetenz und fremdsprachliches Lernen: Modelle, Empirie, Evaluation - Intercultural
competence and foreign language learning: Models, empiricism, assessment, pp. 123-138.
Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.

Ameka, F. 1992. The universal yet neglected part of speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 18(18):101-
118.

Andersen, G. 2001. Pragmatic Markers and Sociolinguistic Variation. A Relevance-Theoretic


Approach to the Language of Adolescents: Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Anderson, B. 1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism.
London: Verso.

Antaki, C., Biazzi, M. & Nissen, A. 2008. Accounting for moral judgments in academic talk: The
case of a conversation analysis data session. Text and Talk, 28(1):1-30.

Athanasiadou, A. 1990. The discourse function of questions. A paper presented in the 9th World
Congress of Applied Linguistics, April 15-21, Halkidiki, Greece.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

178

Atkinson, J.M. & Drew, P. 1979. Order in Court: The Organisation of Verbal Interaction in
Judicial Settings. Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities.

Babbie, E.R. & Rubin, A. 2007. Research Methods for Social Work. Belmont: Thomson
Brooks/Cole.

Bakhtin, M. 1984. Problems of Doestoevsky’s poetics. Trans. Caryl Emerson. Minneapolis:


University of Minnesota Press.Baldwin, L.P. 2010. Editorial. Active Learning in Higher
Education, 11(3):163-166.

Banda, F. 2003. A survey of literacy practices in coloured and black communities in South Africa:
Towards a pedagogy of multiliteracies. Language, Culture & Curriculum, 16(2):173-184.

Banda, F. 2007. Study groups and peer roles in mediated academic literacy events in
multilingual educational contexts in South Africa. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics,
37:1-21.

Banda, F. 2009. Critical perspectives on language planning and policy in Africa : Accounting for the
notion of multilingualism. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics Plus, 38:1-11.

Baptiste, I. 2001. Qualitative Data Analysis: Common Phases, Strategic Differences [42
paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research [On-
line], 2(3). Available: http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs-eng.htm [Accessed
August 31, 2012].

Barlow, A. 2002. Overcoming barriers-widening access to all students. Learning and Teaching in
Action, 1:1-6.

Barnes, D. 1969. Language in the secondary classroom. In D. Barnes, J. Britton & H. Rossen (eds.).
Language, the Learner and the School, pp. 11-77. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Barredo, I.M. 2000. Pragmatic functions of code-switching among basque-spanish bilinguals. Actas
Do I Simposio Internacional Sobre o Bilinguismo, 217:528-541.

Bash, L. (ed.). 2005. Best Practices in Adult Learning. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing.

Batibo, H.M. 1995. The growth of Kiswahili as language of education and administration in
Tanzania. In M. Putz (ed.). Administration Through Language in Africa: Perspectives on
the Namibian Experience, pp. 57-80. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Bell, J. 1999. Doing Your Research Project. A Guide For First Time Researchers in Education and
Social Science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

179

Bellack, A.A., Kliebard, H.M., Hyman R.T. & Smith, F.L. 1966. The Language of the Classroom.
New York: Teachers College Press.

Berg, B.L. 2009. Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. Boston: Pearson
International.

Berry, R.A.W. & Kim, N. 2008. Exploring teacher talk during mathematics instruction in an
inclusion classroom. The Journal of Educational Research, 101(6):363-378.

Bialystok, E. 2001. Bilingualism in Development: Language, Literacy and Cognition. New


York: Cambridge University Press.

Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M., Green, D.W. & Gollan, T.H. 2009. Bilingual minds. Psychological
Science in the Public Interest, 10(3):89-129.

Biber, D. 2006. University Language: A Corpus-based Study of Spoken and Written Registers.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. & Finegan, E. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken
and Written English. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.

Björkman, B. 2008a. 'So where we are': spoken lingua franca English at a Swedish technical
university. English Today, 24(2):11-17.

Björkman, B. 2008b. English as the lingua franca of engineering: the morphosyntax of academic
speech events. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 7(3):103-122.

Blakemore, D. 2002. Relevance and Linguistic Meaning: The Semantics and Pragmatics of
Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Blommaert, J. 2005. Discourse: Key topics in Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University


Press.

Blom, J.-P. & Gumperz, J.J. 2000. Social meaning in linguistic structure: code-switching in
Norway. In W. Li (ed.). The Bilingualism Reader, pp. 111-136. London: Routledge.

Bloomfield, L. 1933. Language. London: Allen and Unwin.

Bloor, T. & Bloor, M. 2004. The Functional Analysis of English: A Hallidayan Approach (2nd
edition). London: Hodder Arnold.

Bolden, G.B. & Robinson, J.D. 2011. Soliciting accounts with why-interrogatives in conversation.
Journal of Communication, 61(1):94-119.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

180

Bolden, G.B. 2008. Implementing incipient actions: The discourse marker 'so' in English
conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(5):974-998.

Boud, D., Cohen, J. & Sampson, J. 2001. Peer Learning in Higher Education. London: Kogan
Page.

Boud, D., Cohen, R. & Sampson, J. 1999. Peer learning and assessment. Assessment in Higher
Education, 24(4):413-26.

Bourdieu, P. 1977. The economics of linguistic exchanges. Social Science Information, 16(6):645-
668.

Brock-Utne, B. 2001. Education for all - in whose language? Oxford Review of Education,
27(1):115-134.

Brock-Utne, B. 2007. Language of instruction and student performance: New insights from research
in Tanzania and South Africa. International Review of Education, 53(5):509-530.

Brock-Utne, B. 2007. Learning through a familiar language versus learning through a foreign
language: A look into some secondary school classrooms in Tanzania. International Journal
of Educational Development, 27(5):487-498.

Brock-Utne, B. 2010. Educational development research and policy on the language of instruction
issue in Africa. International Journal of Educational Development, 30(6):636-645.

Brock-Utne, B., Qorro, M. & Desai, Z. (eds.). 2006. Focus on Fresh Data on the Language of
Instruction Debate in Tanzania and South Africa. Cape Town: African Minds.

Brown, G. & Wragg, E.C. 1993. Questioning. London: Routledge.

Brown, G. & Yule, G. 1983. Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bryman, A. 2001. Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bührig, K. & Thije, T. (eds.). 2006. Beyond Understanding: Linguistic Analysis of Intercultural
Communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Busch, C., De Maret, P.S., Flynn, T., Kellum, R., Le, S., Meyers, B., Saunders, M., White, R. &
Palmquist, M. 2005. Content Analysis. [online]. Available:
http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/research/content/. [Accessed September 02, 2012].

Butcher, S.E. 2006. Narrative as a teaching strategy. Journal of Correctional Education, 57(3):195-
209.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

181

Cameron, D. 2001. Working with Spoken Discourse. Los Angeles: Sage.

Cameron, J. & Dodd, W. 1970. Society, Schools and Progress in Tanzania. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

Campbell, D.T. & Fiske, D.W. 1959. Convergent and discriminant validation by the
multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2):81-105.

Cassell, C. & Symon G. 1994. Qualitative methods in organizational research: A practical guide. In
C. Cassell & G. Symon. Qualitative Research in Work Contexts, pp. 1-13. London: Sage.

Castello, E., Torsello, C.T. & Ackerley, K. (eds.). 2008. Corpora for University Language
Teachers. Bern: Peter Lang.

Cazden, C. 1988. Classroom Discourse. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Cazden, C. 2001. Classroom Discourse: The Language of Teaching and Learning. New York:
College Press.

Cegala, D.J. & Villaume, W.A. 1988. Interaction involvement and discourse strategies: The
patterned use of cohesive devises in conversation. Communication Monographs, 55(1):22-
40.

Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B. & Jessner, U. (eds.). 2003. The Multilingual Lexicon. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic.

Cheepen, C. & Monaghan, J. 1990. Spoken English. A Practical Guide. London: Pinter.

Chi, M.T.H. 1997. Quantifying qualitative analysis of verbal data: A practice guide. The Journal of
the Learning Sciences, 6(3):271-315.

Chickering, A.W. & Gamson, Z.F. 1987. Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate
education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7):3-7.

Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

Christie, F. 2002. Classroom Discourse Analysis: A Functional Perspective. London: Continuum.

Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. 2007. Research Methods in Education (6th edition). London:
Routledge Falmer.

Collins, J. 1987. Conversation and knowledge in bureaucratic settings. Discourse Processes,


10(4):303-319.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

182

Congos, D.H. & Schoeps, N. 1998. Inside supplemental instruction sessions: One model of what
happens that improves grades and retention. Research and Teaching in Developmental
Education, 15(1):47-61.

Cook, G. 1989. Discourse in Language Teaching: A Scheme for Language Teachers. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.

Corson, D. 1997. The learning and use of academic English words. Language Learning, 47(4):671-
718.

Coulthard, M. 1985. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. London: Longman.

Courter, S., Balaraman, P., Lace, J. & Hochgraf, C. (eds.). Strategies for Effective Teaching.
A Handbook for Teaching Assistants. Madison: University of Wisconsin.

Creswell, J.W. 2007. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions,
(2nd ed.). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J.W. 2009. Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches.
Los Angeles: Sage.

Crystal, D. & Davy, D. 1975. The English Tone of Voice. London: Edward Arnold.

Crystal, D. 2003. English as a Global Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cuenca, M. 2009. Co-occurrence of discourse markers in Catalan and Spanish oral narrative.
Journal of Pragmatics, 41(5):899-914.

Cuenca, M.J. 2008. Pragmatic markers in contrast: The case of well. Journal of Pragmatics,
40(8):1373-1391.

Cullen, R. 2002. Supportive teacher talk: the importance of the F-move. ELT Journal, 56(2):117-
127.

Cummins, J. & Swain, M. 1986. Bilingualism in Education: Aspects of Theory, Research and
Practice. New York: Longman.

Cummins, J. 1992. Bilingual education and English immersion: The Ramírez Report in theoretical
perspective. Bilingual Research Journal, 16(1&2):91-104.

Dachi, H.A. 2006. Investing in children's right to learn through the language of teaching and
learning: An investment in human capital. Papers in Education and Development, 26:32-42.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

183

Dalton-Puffer, C. 2007. Outcomes and processes in content and language integrated learning
(CLIL): Current research from Europe. In W. Delanoy & L. Volkmann (eds.). Future
Perspectives for English Language Teaching. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.

Dalton-Puffer, C. 2009. Explaining: a central discourse function in instruction. In III Colloquium on


Semi-Immersion in Catalonia: International Roundtable on CLIL programme 28th and 29th
April.

Davies, M. 2008. The corpus of contemporary American English (COCA): 385 million words,
1990-present. [Online], available: http://www.americancorpus.org. [Accessed May 8, 2010].

De Vita, G. 2000. Inclusive approaches to effective communication and active participation in the
multicultural classroom: An international business management context. Active Learning in
Higher Education, 1(2):168-180.

De Vito, K.M. 2009. Implementing adult learning principles to overcome barriers of learning in
continuing Higher Education Programmes. Online Journal of Workforce Education and
Development, III(4):1-10.
Availableat:opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1058&context. [Accessed
September 22, 2012].

Denzin, N.K. 2001. The reflexive interview and a performative social science. Qualitative
Research, 1(23):23-46.

Devita, G. 2000. Inclusive approaches to effective communication and active participation in


the multicultural classroom: An international business management context. Active
Learning in Higher Education, 1(2):168-180.

Dills, C.R. & Romiszowski, A.J. 1997. The instructional development paradigm: An introduction.
In C.R. Dills & A.J. Romiszowski (eds.). Instructional Development Paradigms.
Englewood, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, Inc.

Dippold, D. 2011. Argumentative discourse in L2 German: A sociocognitive perspective on the


development of facework strategies. The Modern Language Journal, 95(2):172-187.

Dooley, R.A. & Levinsohn, S.H. 2001. Analysing Discourse: A Manual of Basic Concepts. Texas:
SIL International.

Drew, P. 1985. Analyzing the use of language in courtroom interaction. In T.A. van Dijk (ed.).
Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Vol. 3. Discourse and Dialogue, pp. 133-148. London:
Academic Press.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

184

Duff, P.A. 2007. Problematising academic discourse socialisation. In R. Marriott, H. Moore, & T.
Spence-Brown (eds.). Learning Discourses and the Discourses of Learning, pp. 1-18.
Melbourne: Monash University ePress.

DuFon, M.A. 1995. The Acquisition of Gambits by Classroom Foreign Language Learners of
Indonesian. Paper presented at the Third Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistic
Society 1993, Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University. Program for Southeast Asian Studies,
pp. 27-42.

Dunkin, M. J. 1983. A review of research on lecturing. Higher Education Research and


Development, 2(1), pp. 63-78.

Edwards, A.D. & Westgate, D.P.G. (eds.). 1994. Investigating Classroom Talk (2nd edition).
London: The Falmer Press.

Eisenhardt, K. 1989. Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review,
14(4):532-550.

Elbow, P. 1991. Reflections on academic discourse: How it relates to freshmen and colleagues.
College English, 53(2):135-155.

Erickson, F. 1982. Classroom discourse as improvisation. In L.C. Wilkinson (ed.). Communication


in the Class-room, pp. 153-181. New York: Academic.

Ethnolugue 2005. Languages of the world. In R.I. Gordon (ed.). Ethnologue: Languages of the
World (15th edition). Gothenburg: SIL International.

Fairclough, N. 2001. Critical discourse analysis. In A. McHoul & M. Rapley (eds.). How to Analyse
Talk in Institutional Settings: A Casebook of Methods, pp. 25-38. New York: Continuum.

Ferguson, C.A. 1964 [1959]. Diglossia. In D. Hymes (ed.). Language in Culture and Society, pp.
429-439. New York: Harper and Row.

Field, R. 2004. Student responses to an academic’s search for a flexible alternative-quality teaching
delivery method. In Proceedings of OLT 2004: Exploring integrated learning environments.
[Online]. Available: https://olt.qut.edu.au/udf/olt2004/index.cfm.[Accessed July20th 2012].

Finlay, S. & Faulkner, G. 2005. Tête à tête: Reading groups and peer learning. Active Learning in
Higher Education, 6(1):32-45.

Firth, A. 1996. The discursive accomplishment of normality: On "lingua franca" English and
conversation analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 26(2):237-259.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

185

Firth, J. R. 1935. The technique semantics. Transactions of the Philological Society, 36-72.

Fishman, J.A. (ed.). 1968. Readings in the sociology of language. A paper presented at the
Proceeding of the 8th International Congress of Linguistics in 1958. The Hague: Mouton.

Flanders, N.A. 1970. Analyzing Teaching Behaviour. Reading, Mass: Addison Wesley.

Fortanet, I. 2004. The use of 'we' in university lectures: Reference and function. English for
Specific Purposes, 23(1):45-66.

Fraser, B. 1990. An approach to discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(14):383-395.

Gabrielatos, C. 1997. A question of function: Teacher questions in the EFL classroom. A paper
presented at the 18th Annual TESOL Greece Convention. Glyfada, Greece, 12-13 April.

Galabawa J. & Senkoro, F. 2006. Implications of changing the language of instruction in secondary
and tertiary education in Tanzania. In B. Brock-Utne, M. Qorro & Z. Desai (eds.). Focus on
Fresh Data on the Language of Instruction Debate in Tanzania and South Africa. Cape
Town: African Minds.

Garcia, O. 2009. Bilingual Education in the 21st Century: A Global Perspective. Oxford: Basil
Blackwell.

Garfinkel, H. 1967. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity.

Gee, J.P. 1991. A linguistic approach to narrative. Journal of Narrative and Life
History/Narrative Inquiry, 1(1):15-39.

Gee, J.P. 2011. Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method (3rd ed.). New York:
Routledge.

Genesee, F. 2004. What do we know about bilingual education for majority language students? In
T.K. Bhatia & W. Ritchie (eds.). Handbook of Bilingualism and Multiculturalism, pp. 547-
576. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Geuss, R. 1981. The Idea of a Critical Theory. Habermas and the Frankfurt School. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Gibbs, G. 1982. Twenty terrible reasons for lecturing. SCEDSIR Occasional Paper (No. 6).

Goffman, E. 1981. Forms of Talk. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Golato, A. 2003. Studying complement responses: A comparison of DTCs and recordings of


naturally occurring talk. Applied Linguistics, 24(1):90-121.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

186

Gollan, T.H., Montoya, R., Fennema-Notestine, C. & Morris, S. 2005. Bilingualism affects
picture naming but not picture classification. Memory and Cognition, 33(7):1220-
1234.

Goodwin, C. & Heritage, J. 1990. Conversation analysis. Annual Review of Anthropology,


19(1):283-307.

Graneheim, U.H. & Lundman, B. 2004. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research concepts,
procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24(2):105-
112.

Grice, H.P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J.L. Morgan (eds.). Syntax and Semantics:
Speech Acts, pp. 41-58. New York: Academic Press.

Grundy, P. 2000. Doing Pragmatics. London: Arnold.

Guba, E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. 1994. Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin &
Y.S. Lincoln (eds.). Handbook of Qualitative Research, pp. 105-117. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Gulzar, M.A. 2010. Code-switching: Awareness about its utility in bilingual classrooms. Bulletin of
Education and Research, 32(2):23-44.

Gumberz, J.J. 1982. Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Haberlandt, H. 2011. Ownership and maintenance of a language in transnational use: Should we


leave our lingua franca alone? Journal of Pragmatics, 43(4):937-949.

Hale, S. 1999. Interpreters' treatment of discourse markers in courtroom questions. Forensic


Linguistics, 6(1):57-82.

Halliday, M.A.K. & Hasan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.

Halliday, M.A.K. 1961. Categories of the theory of grammar. Word, 17(3):241-92.

Halliday, M.A.K. 1978. Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and
Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M.A.K. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

Hamers, J.F. & Blanc, M.H.A. 2000. Bilingual and Bilingualism (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Hammond, J., Bithell, C., Jones, L. & Bidgood, P. 2010. A first year experience of student-directed
peer-assisted learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(3):201-212.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

187

Harvey, S. & Goudvis, A. 2000. Strategies That Work: Teaching Comprehension to Enhance
Understanding. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.

Heap, J. 1990. Applied ethno methodology: Looking for the local rationality of reading activities.
Human Studies, 13(1):39-72.

Heath, A.W. 1997. The Proposal in Qualitative Research. The Qualitative Report, 3(1). [Online].
Available: http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-1/heath.html. [Accessed September 16,
2012].

Hénard, F. 2010. Learning our lesson: Review of quality teaching in higher education. Paris: OECD
Publishing.

Henning, E., Van Rensburg, W. & Smit, B. 2004. Finding Your Way in Qualitative Research (1st
edition). Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers.

Heras, A.I. 1994. The construction of understanding in a sixth grade bilingual classroom. Linguistics
& Education, 5(3 & 4):275-299.

Heritage, J. & Drew, P. (eds.). 1992. Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Heritage, J. 1984. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Heritage, J. 1997. Conversation analysis and institutional talk: analysing data. In D. Silverman (ed.).
Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice, pp. 161-182. London: Sage.

Heritage, J. 2007. Constructing and navigating epistemic landscapes: Progressivity, agency and
resistance in initial elements of responses to yes/no questions. Paper presented at the
International Pragmatics Association Conference, Göteborg, Sweden.

Holmes, J. 1986. Functions of you know in women's and men's speech. Language in Society,
15(1):1-21.

Holmes, J. 1995. Women, Men and Politeness. London: Longman.

House, J. 2003. English as a lingua franca: A threat to multilingualism? Journal of Sociolinguistics,


7(4):556-579.

House, J. 2009. Subjectivity in English as lingua franca discourse: The case of 'you know'.
Intercultural Pragmatics, 6(2):171-193.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

188

Hughes, C.E., Shaunessy, E.S., Brice, A.E., Ratliff, M.A. & McHatton, P.A. 2006. Code switching
among bilingual and limited English proficient students: Possible indicators of giftedness.
Journal of Education for the Gifted, 30(1):7-28.

Husen, T. 1999. Research Paradigms in Education. Issues in Educational Research. Oxford:


Pergamon.

Hutchby, I. & Wooffitt, R. 2008. Conversation analysis (2nd edition). Cambridge: Polity.

Jenkins, J. 2000. The Phonology of English as an International Language: New Models, New
Norms, New Goals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jenkins, J. 2008. English as a Lingua Franca. In JACET 47 Annual Convention. Waseda: Waseda
University, pp. 11-13.

Johnstone, B. 2008. Discourse Analysis. (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Johnstone, B. 1994. Repetition in discourse: A dialogue. In B. Johnstone (ed.). Repetition in


Discourse: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 1: 1-20.

Johnstone, B. 2002. Discourse Analysis. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell.

Jong-Bok, K. & Ji-Young, A. 2008. English tag questions: Corpus findings and theoretical
implications. English Language and Linguistics, 25:103-126.

Joseph, M. & Raman, E. 2006. The dual-medium BA degree in English and Sesotho Sa Leboa at
the University of Limpopo: Success and challenges. In B., Brock-Utne, Z., Desai & M.
Qorro (eds.). Focus on fresh data in the Language of Instruction debate in Tanzania and
South Africa, pp. 4-8. Cape Town: African Minds.

Jucker, A.H. 1993. The discourse marker well: A relevance-theoretical account. Journal of
Pragmatics, 19:435-452.

Kachru, B.B. 1998. English as an Asian language. Links and Letters, 5:89-108.

Kaur, J. 2010. Achieving mutual understanding in world Englishes. World Englishes, 29(2):192-
208.

Keller, E. 1981. Gambits: Conversational strategy signals. In F. Coulmas (ed.). Conversational


Routine. The Hague: Mouton.

Keller, R. 2005. Analysing Discourse: An approach from Sociology of Knowledge. Qualitative


Social Research. [Online]. Availablehttp:// www.qualitative_ research.net/fqs_text/3-
05/05_3_32_e.htm. [Accessed April 09, 2012].
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

189

Kelly, M., & Stafford, K. 1993. Managing small group discussion. Hong Kong: Professional
Development Unit, City Polytechnic of Hong Kong.

Kerlinger, F.N. 1973. Foundations of Behavioral Research (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rhinehart
and Winston.

Kimizi, M.M. 2008. Why has the language of instruction policy been so ambivalent over the last
forty years? In B. Brock-Utne, Z. Desai, & M. Qorro (eds.). LOITASA: Reflecting on Phase
I and entering Phase II, 143-159. Dar Es Salaam: E&D Vision Publishing Limited.

Klimpfinger, T. 2007. Mind you, sometimes you have to mix - The role of code-switching in
English as a lingua franca. Vienna English Working Papers 16(2):36-62.

Knutson, E. 2010. Repetition as response in conversational interaction and language learning. The
NECTFL Review, 66:14-29.

Kohlbacher, F. 2005. The Use of Qualitative Content Analysis in Case Study Research. Forum:
Qualitative Social Research [Online], Available: http/www.qualitative-research.net/fgs-
texte/1-06/06-1-21-e.htm [Accessed July17, 2011].

Krauss, S.E. 2005. Research paradigms and meaning making: A primer. The Qualitative Report,
10(4):758-770.

Kuhn, T.S. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd ed.). London: The University of
Chicago Press.

Kvale, S. 1996. The Quality of the Interview. In Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research
Interviewing, pp. 144-159. London: Sage.

Lam, M. 2010. English-Cantonese code-switching and code-mixing in online chats in Hong Kong.
The University of Hong Kong. [Online]. Available: http://hub.hku.hk/handle/10722/130895.
[Accessed September 24, 2012].

Lampi, M. 1986. Linguistic Components of Strategy in Business Negotiations. Helsinki: Helsingin


Kauppakorkeakoulun Kuvalaitos.

Lawson, A.E. 2002. Teaching concepts and developing reasoning skills using learning cycles. The
School Science Review, 1(4):1-19.

Leftein, A. & Snell, J. 2011. Promises and problems of teaching with popular culture: A linguistic
ethnographic analysis of discourse genre mixing in literacy lesson. Reading Research
Quarterly, 46(1):40-69.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

190

Lehtonen, T., Lönnfors, P. & Virkkunen-Fullenwider, A. 1999: English or Not English: That is the
Question! Teaching Through English at the University of Helsinki. Helsingin yliopiston
Opintoasiaintoimiston julkaisuja 18/1999. Helsinki: Yliopistopaino.

Leibowitz, B. 2005. Learning in additional language in a multilingual society: A South African case
study on university-level writing. TESOL Quarterly, 39(4):661-681.

Lemke, J.L. 1990. Talking Science: Language, Learning, and Values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Lesznyák, Á. 2002. From chaos to the smallest common denominator. Topic management in
English lingua franca communication. In K. Knapp & C. Meierkord (eds.). Lingua Franca
Communication, 163-193. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Levinson, S. 1992. Activity type and language. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.). Talk at Work:
Interaction in Institutional Settings, pp. 66-100. Cambridge: CUP.

Li, D.C.S. 2008. Cantonese-English code-switching research in Hong Kong: A Y2K review. World
Englishes, 19(3):305-322.

Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. 1985. Naturalistic Enquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.

Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. 1990. Judging the quality of case study reports. Qualitative Studies in
Education, 3(1):53-59.

Ljosland, R. 2010. Teaching through English: Monolingual policy meets multilingual practice.
Hermes - Journal of Language and Communication Studies, (45):99-114.

Long, H.M. 2003. Stabilization and fossilization in interlanguage development. In C.J. Doughty &
M.H. Long (eds.). Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, pp. 487-535. Oxford:
Blackwell.

Long, M.H. & Sato, C. 1983. Classroom foreigner talk discourse: Forms and functions of teachers
questions. In H.W. Seliger & M.H. Long (eds.). Classroom Oriented Research in Second
Language Acquisition. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.

Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (2005). (Updated edition). Pearson.

Lyster, R. 1998. Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and
learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 48(2):183-218.

Lyster, R. 2004. Differential effects of prompts and recasts in Form-Focused Instruction. SSLA,
26(3):399-432.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

191

Macnamara, J. 1967. The bilingual's linguistic performance: A psychological overview. Journal of


Sociological Issues, 23:58-77.

Mafu, S. 2004. From the oral tradition to the information era: The Case of Tanzania. International
Journal on Multicultural Societies, 6(1):53-78.

Mande, W. M. 2001. The appropriate use of the lecture method in higher education. In Mande,
Wilson Muyinda (ed.). Effective teaching in higher education. Entebbe: Nkumba
University,49-62.

Marginson, S. & Rhoades, G. 2002. Beyond national states, markets, and systems of higher
education : A glonacal agency heuristic. Higher Education, 43(3):281-309.

Marginson, S. 2006. Dynamics of national and global competition in higher education. Journal of
Higher Education, 52(1):1-39.

Markwell, D. 2003. The urgent challenge of world-class university teaching and learning.
Business/Higher Education Round Table. B-HERT News, (18):1-40.

Mason, J. 2002. Generating Qualitative Data Observation, Documents and Visual Data.
Qualitative Research. London: Sage.

Mauranen, A. 2003. The corpus of English as lingua franca in academic settings. TESOL Quarterly,
37(3):513-527.

Mauranen, A. 2007. Discourse reflexivity and international speakers-how is it used in English as


lingua franca? Jezik in slovstvo, 52(3).

McCarthy, T. 2001. Issues in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McCormick, D.E. & Donato, R. 2000. Teacher questions as scaffolded assistance in an ESL
classroom. In J.K. Hall & L.S. Verplaetse (eds.). Second and Foreign Language Learning
Through Classroom Interaction, pp. 183-201. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

McHoul, A. 1978. The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society,
7(2):183-213.

McHoul, A.A.W. 1990. The organization of repair in classroom talk. Language in Society,
19(3):349-377.

McInnis, C. 2003. Emerging issues for teaching and learning in Australian universities.
Business/Higher Education Round Table. B-HERT News, 18:1-40.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

192

McKeachie, W.J., Pintrich, P.R., Lin, Y-G. & Smith D.A.F. 1986. Teaching and Learning in the
College Classroom: A Review of the Research Literature. Ann Arbor: The Regents of the
University of Michigan.

Mehan, H. 1985. The structure of classroom interaction. In T. Van Dijk (ed.). A Handbook of
Discourse Analysis, vol. III: Discourse and Dialogue, pp. 120-132. London: Academic
Press.

Meierkord, C. 1998. Lingua franca English: Characteristics of successful non-native - non-native


speaker discourse. [Online] Available. (http://webdoc.sub.gwdg.de/edoc/ia/eese/eese.html)
Accessed September 22, 2012]

Meierkord, C. 2000. Interpreting successful lingua franca interaction: an analysis of non-native-


/non-native small talk conversations in English. Linguistik online (5). Available at
http://www.linguistik-online.de/1_00?MEIERKOR.HTM (Accessed January 18, 2012).

Milne, E.D. 2006. Solidarity strategies in CLIL university lectures: Teachers' use of pronouns and
modal verbs. Vienna English Working Papers, 15(3):9-14.

Mkilifi, M.H.A. 1972. Triglossia and Swahili-English bilingualism in Tanzania. Language in


Society, 1(2):197-213.

Mlama, P. & Materu, M. 1978. Haja ya kutumia Kiswahili Kufundisha Katika Elimu ya Juu. Dar es
Salaam: Baraza la Kiswahili la Taifa.

Montgomery, M. 1986. An Introduction to Language and Society. London: Methuen.

Morell, T. 2004. Interactive lecture discourse for university EFL students. English for Specific
Purposes 23(3):325-338.

Mouton, J. 2001. How to Succeed in your Master's and Doctoral Studies, A South African Guide
and Resource Book. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers.

Muzale, H.R.T. & Rugemalira, J.M. 2008. Researching and documenting the languages of
Tanzania. Language Documentation and Conservation, 2(1):68-108.

Mwinsheikhe, H.M. 2009. Spare no means: Battling with the English/Kiswahili dilemma in
Tanzanian secondary school classrooms. In B. Brock-Utne & I. Skattum (eds.). Languages
and Education in Africa: A Comparative and Transdisciplinary Analysis. Bristol Papers in
Education. Number 4. Symposium Books.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

193

Myers-Scotton, C. 1993. Common and uncommon ground: Social and structural factors in
codeswitching. Language in Society, 22(4):475-503.

Myers-Scotton, C. 1997. Duelling Languages, Grammatical Structure in Code Switching (2nd


edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nemetz-Robinson, G.L. 1988. Cross Cultural Understanding. London: Prentice Hall.

Neuman, I. & Benz, C.R. 1998. Qualitative-quantitative Research Methodology: Exploring the
Interactive Continuum. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Neuman, W.L. 2006. Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. New
York: Pearson.

Norrick, N.N. 1987. Functions of repetition in conversation. Text, 7(3):245-264.

Northedge, A. 2003. Enabling participation in academic discourse. Teaching in Higher Education,


8(2):169-180.

Nowotny, A. 2004. The Functions of Okay in Classroom Discourse v The Functions of Okay in
Task-Oriented Discourse. Discourse Analysis [Online] available at
www.cs.columbia.edu/.../673nowotny2004.pdf.

O'Connor, M.C. & Michaels, S. 1993. Aligning academic task and participation status through
revoicing: Analysis of a classroom discourse strategy. Anthropology and Education
Quarterly, 24(4):318-335.

Ochs, E. 1986. Introduction. In E. Schieffelin & E. Ochs (eds.). Language Socialization Across
Cultures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Oestreicher, J.P. 1974. The early teaching of modern language, education and culture. Review
of the C'oimcil, for Culturul Cooperation of the C'ouncil of Europe, 24:9-16.

Oller, D. K., Cobo-Lewis, A & Pearson, B. Z. 2007. Profile Effects in Early Bilingual
Language and Literacy. Applied Psycholinguistics 28 (2): 191-230.

Oksaar, E. 1983. Language acquisition in the early years: an introduction to paedolinguistics.


London: Batsford Academic and Educational.

Osgood, C.E. & Sebeok, T.A. 1965. Psycholinguistics. A Survey of Theory and Research Problems.
London: Indiana University Press.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

194

Patton, M.Q. 1990. Qualitative Interviewing. In M.Q. Patton (ed.). Qualitative Evaluation and
Research Methods, pp. 277-367. London: Sage.

Popkewitz, T.S. 1984. Paradigm and Ideology in Educational Research: The Social Functions of
the Intellectual. London: The Falmer Press.

Poplac, S. 2001. Code switching: Linguistic. International Encyclopaedia of the Social and
Behavioural Sciences, 2062-2065.

Portocarrero, J.S., Burright, R.G. & Donovick, P.J. 2007. Vocabulary and verbal fluency of
bilingual and monolingual college students. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology,
22(3):415-422.

Potter, J. & Wetherell, M. 1987. Discourse and Social Psychology. London: Sage.

Psathas, G. 1995. Conversation Analysis. The Study of Talk-in-Interaction. Qualitative Research


Methods. London: Sage.

Qorro, M.A.S. & Roy-Campbell, Z.M. (1997). Language Crisis in Tanzania: The Myth of English
versus Education. Dar es Salaam: Mkuki na Nyota Publishers.

Qorro, M.A.S. 2009. Parents' and policy makers' insistence on foreign language as medium of
education in Africa: Restricting access to quality education-for whose benefit? In: B. Brock-
Utne & I. Skattum (eds.). Languages and Education in Africa. Oxford: Symposium Books.

Rego, A. 2003. Citizenship behaviours of university teachers: The graduates' point of view. Active
Learning in Higher Education, 4(1):8-23.

Roberts, C.A. 1995. Bilingual education programme models: A framework for understanding. The
Bilingual Research Journal, 19(3):369-378.

Roostini, K.E. 2011. A reflection on teacher questioning types. Indonesian Journal of Applied
Linguistics, 1(1):9-22.

Rose, S. 2006. The functions of code switching in a multicultural and multilingual high school.
Unpublished MPhil dissertation Stellenbosch University.

Rossignol, M. 1997. Relationship between selected discourse strategies and student critical thinking.
The Journal of Nursing Education, 36(10):467-75.

Rubagumya, C.M. 1991. Language promotion for educational purposes: The example of Tanzania.
International Review of Education, 37:67-85.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

195

Rubagumya, C.M. 1998. Choosing the language of instruction in Post-Colonial Africa: Lessons
from Tanzania. Papers in Education and Development, 20:125-142.

Rubagumya, C.M. 2008. Going through the motions of learning: Classroom interaction in Tanzania.
In B. Brock-Utne, Z. Desai & M. Qorro (eds.). LOITASA: Reflecting on Phase I and
entering Phase II, 143-159.

Ruhl, K., Hughes, C. & Schloss, P. 1987. Using the pause procedure to enhance lecture recall.
Teacher Education and Special Education, 10:14-18.

Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A. & Jefferson, G. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-
taking for conversation. Linguistic Society of America, 50(3):696-735.

Schiffrin, D. 2012. Conversational coherence : The role of well. Linguistic Society of America,
61(3):640-667.

Schiffrin, D. 1987. Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schffrin, D. 1993. Research, talk on, for and with social subjects. Language and Communication,
13(2):133-136.

Schleppegrell, M.J. 2009. Language in academic subject areas and classroom instruction: what is
academic language and how can we teach it? National Academies [Online]. Available:
http://www7.nationalacademies.org/CFE/Paper_Mary_Schleppegrell.pdf [Accessed
September 26, 2011].

Schourup, L. 1999. Discourse markers. Lingua, 107:227-265.

Scollon, R. 2001. Mediated Discourse: The Nexus of Practice. London: Routledge.

Seidlhofer, B. 2005. Key concepts in ELT: English as a lingua franca. ELT Journal, 59(4):107-125

Setati, M. 1998. Code-switching in a senior primary class of second-language mathematics learners.


For the Learning of Mathematics, 18(1):34-40.

Sherzer, J. 1987. A discourse-centered approach to language and culture. American Anthropologist,


89(2):295-309.

Shin, S-Y. 2010. The functions of Code-switching in a Korean Sunday School. Heritage Language
Journal, 7(1):91-116.

Shin, S.J. & Milroy, L. 2000. Conversational code switching among Korean-English bilingual
children. International Journal of Bilingualism, 4(3):351-383.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

196

Sim, L 2003 Student perceptions of peer learning in the English unit ‘Romanticism and Revolution’,
in A Bunker and M O’Sullivan (eds.). Partners in Learning: Proceedings of the 12th
Annual Teaching and Learning Forum, 11–12 February 2003. Perth, Australia: Edith
Cowan University.

Sinclair, J.M. & Coulthard, R. M. 1975. Towards an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by
Teachers and Pupils. London: Oxford University Press.

Skiba, R. 1997. Code Switching as a Countenance of Language Interference. [Online]. available


http://iteslj.org/Articles/Skiba-CodeSwitching.html [accessed August 30 2012].

Smit, U. 2008. Classroom interaction in English as a lingua franca. A discourse pragmatic


ethnography in international higher education. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Vienna: University
of Vienna.

Smit, U. 2010. English as a lingua franca in higher education: a longitudinal study of classroom
discourse. In U. Jessner & C. Kramsch (eds.). Trends in Applied Linguistics. Berlin: Walter
de Gruyter.

Soliman, I. 1999. Introduction to University Teaching Series: Lecturing to Large Groups.


University of New England: The Teaching and Learning Centre.

Spack, R. 1988. Initiating ESL Students into the Academic Discourse Community: How Far Should
We Go? TESOL Quarterly, 22:29-51.

Stede, M. & Schmitz, B. 2000. Discourse Particles and Discourse Functions. Machine Translation,
15(1-2):125-147.

Stern, H. H. 1973. Bilingual Schooling and Second Language Teaching: A Review of Recent
North American Experience, in J. W. Oller, Jr. and J. C. Richards (Eds.): Focus on the
Learner: Pragmatic Perspectives for the Language Teacher. New York: Newbury House
Publishers, Inc.

Stubbe, M. 1999. Just do it …!": Discourse Strategies for Getting the Message Across in a Factory
Production Team . In Proceedings of the 1999 Conference of the Australian Linguistic
Society, 1-18.

Stubbs, M. 1983. Discourse Analysis: The Sociolinguistic Analysis of Natural Language. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

197

Svartvik, J. & Quirk, R. (eds.). 1980. A Corpus of English Conversation. Lund Studies in English.
Lund: Lund University Press.

Swann, J. & Sinka, I. 2007. Style shifting, code switching. In D. Graddol, D. Leith, J. Swann, M.
Rhys & J. Gillen (eds.). Changing English. London: Routledge.

Swilla, I.N. 2009. Languages of instruction in Tanzania: contradictions between ideology, policy
and implementation. African Study Monographs, 30(1):1-14.

Taboada, M. & Wiesemann, L. 2010. Subjects and topics in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics,
42(7):1816-1828.

Taboada, M. 2006. Discourse markers as signals (or not) of rhetorical relations. Journal of
Pragmatics, 38(4):567-592.

Taha, T.A. 2009. Language alternation in university classrooms. Journal of Instructional


Psychology, 35(4):336-346.

Tannen, D. 1987. Repetition and poetics of talk. Language, 63(3):574-605.

Tannen, D. 2007. Talking Voices (2nd edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tarone, E. 1979. Interlanguage as chameleon. Language Learning, 29(1):181-191.

Tay, D. 2011. Language and communication discourse markers as metaphor signaling devices in
psychotherapeutic talk. Language and Communication, 31(4):310-317.

Taylor, G. 2002. Teaching gambits: The effect of instruction and task variation on the use of
conversation strategies by intermediate Spanish students. Foreign Language Annals,
35(2):171-189.

TCU 2012. Accredited Universities in Tanzania.


[Online].Availablehttp://www.tcu.go.tz/universities/uni_colleges.php [Accessed March 22,
2012].

Tellis, W. 1997. Introduction to case study. The Qualitative Report (On-line serial), 3.

ten Have, P. 2001. Applied conversation analysis. In A. McHoul & M. Rapley (eds.). How to
Analyse Talk in Institutional Settings: A Casebook of Methods,. 3-11. New York:
Continuum.

Terre Blanche, M. & Durrheim, K. (eds.). 1999. Research in Practice Applied Methods for Social
Sciences. Cape Town: Cape Town University Press.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

198

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th ed.) 2009. On line at
www.amazon.com.

Tibategeza, E.R. 2010. Implementation of bilingual education in Tanzania: The realities in the
schools. Nordic Journal of African Studies, 19(4):227-249.

Tilya, F. 2006. Language of instruction and learning: Implications on equity, quality and poverty
alleviation. Papers in Education and Development, 26:1-20.

Tollefson, J.W. 2002. Language rights and the destruction of Yugoslavia. In J.W. Tollefson (ed.).
Language Policies in Education: Critical Issues, pp. 179-199. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
Associates.

Tottie, G. & Hoffmann, S. 2006. Tag questions in British and American English. Journal of English
Linguistics, 34(4):283-311.

Transkanen, S-K. 2006. Collaborating Towards Coherence. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Traugott, E.C. 1995. The role of the development of discourse markers in a theory of
grammaticalization. Paper presented at ICHL XII, Manchester.

Trochim, W.M. 2000. The research methods knowledge base. [Online]. Available:
bhttp://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/[accessed August, 31 20111.

Tsui, A.B.M. 1995. Introducing Classroom Interaction. London: Penguin.

Turner, K.H. 2009. Flipping the switch: Code switching from text speak to standard English.
English Journal, 98(5):60-65.

Umit, H. 2005. Case Studies. IAG-3940 Methodologie de la Recherche en Sciences de Gestion.


Universite Catholique de Louvain. Institut d'aministration et Gestion, Louvain-la-Neuve
Belgique.

USA, 2012. Air Force Instruction Manual 36-2903. Available:


http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/edref/afman36-2236.pdf. [accessed 29 August 2012].

Uys, D. 2010. The functions of teachers ' code switching in multilingual and multicultural high
school classrooms in the Siyanda District of the Northern Cape Province. Unpublished
MPhil thesis. Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch University.

Viano, D.M.M & Conejos, P.G. 1996. Communicative functions of repetition in classroom
interaction. Research in Second Language Acquisition, 11:129-141.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

199

Vuzo, M. 2005. Using English as a medium of instruction in Tanzanian secondary schools:


Problems and prospects. In B. Brock-Utne, Z. Desai & M. Qorro. Language of Instruction
in Tanzania and South Africa. LOITASA Research in Progress.

Waddington, S. & McCaffery, C. (eds.). 2010. Large group teaching-the local context: reflections
on practice in the National University of Ireland. NUI Maynooth: Centre for Teaching and
Learning.

Walker, J.C. & Evers, C.W. 1999. Research in education: Epistemological issues. In J.P. Keeves &
G. Lakomski (eds.). Issues in Educational Research. Oxford: Pergamon.

Wang, Y.F., Tsai, P.H. & Yang, Y.T. 2010. Objectivity, subjectivity and intersubjectivity: Evidence
from qishi ("actually") and shishishang ("in fact") in spoken Chinese. Journal of
Pragmatics, 42(3):705-727.

Warren, M. 2006. Features of Naturalness in Conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Watterson, M. 2008. Repair of non-understanding in English in international communication. World


Englishes, 27(3-4):378-406.

Webb, E.J., Campbell, D.T., Schwartz, R.D. & Sechrest, L. 1966. Unobtrusive Measures. Chicago:
Rand McNally.

Wells, G. 1996. Using the tool-kit of discourse activity of language and teaching. Mind, Culture and
Activity, 3(2):74-101.

Welman, C., Mitchell, B. & Kruger, F. 2005. Research methodology (3rd ed.). Cape Town: Oxford
University Press.

Westly, B.E. 2011. The Bilingual Advantage. Scientific American Advantage. [Online]. Available:
www.ScientificAmerican.com/Mind [Accessed July 28, 2012].

Widdowson, H.G. 1990. Aspects of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wragg, E.C. 1999. An Introduction to Classroom Observation (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

Zabrodskaja, A. 2007. Russian-Estonian Code-Switching in the University. SLA & Teaching,


14:123-139

Zabrodskaja, A. 2008. Code-switching and L2 students in the university: Bilingualism as an


enriching resource. JoLIE, 1:99-114.

Zabrodskaja, A. 2009. Diminishing intergroup discordance through cross cultural communication


courses. JoLIE, 1(2):197-217.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

200

Zeevat, H. 2000. Discourse particles as speech act markers. Fachbetträge, 17(1):74-91.

Zhang, J. 2012. Discourse markers in college English listening instruction: An empirical study of
Chinese learners. English Language Teaching, 5(3):46-62.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

201

Appendix A

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE FOR


SELECTED LECTURERS

I. OPENING
My name is Mr. Shartiely and I am an Assistant Lecturer in the department of Foreign Languages
and Linguistics (UDSM). Currently I am pursuing PhD studies in linguistics at Stellenbosch
University (SA). As we agreed in our first meeting, I should interview you so that I get additional
data for my study following my observation of your lecture on ……………… (date) this year.
Particularly I would like to ask you some questions about your educational background, some
teaching experiences you have had, and some of your observations concerning the language of
classroom interaction at the University of Dar es Salaam.
I hope to use this information to help document the range of discourse strategies that Lecturer use,
how and why they use them.
The interview should take about 30 minutes. Are you available to respond to some questions at this
time?
Let me begin by asking you some questions about your education and carrier background.

A. General carrier and education background information


1. How long have you been teaching in this University?
2. Where else have you taught before?
3. Where did you pursue your studies?
a. Undergraduate
b. Masters
c. Doctoral
4. At undergraduate level did you train as a teacher?
5. During your carrier have you ever attended a teaching methodology course?
i. Yes
ii. No
iii. If yes, when and where?

B. Language issues
1. During your secondary education which medium of instruction was used?
a. English
b. Kiswahili
c. English and Kiswahili
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

202

2. A lot of people complain that the students of the University of Dar es Salaam have low level of
proficiency in English language, what is your opinion about this claim?
3. Have you ever experienced a situation where you introduced a topic to students and you felt
that they did not understand what you meant?
4. If yes, what do you do to help them understand what you mean?

C. Discourse strategies
1. During your lecture on ……………… (date) at point 'X' you used discourse strategy "Y", why
did you choose to use it?
2. You also used strategies (abc) at points (xyz), did you plan to use them before you came to
class?
3. How can you describe the way the strategies help you in teaching?

D. Opinion
1. What difficulty do you think students experience by learning in English?
2. Which language would you recommend to be used in teaching at the University?
3. Why?

E. Closing
Well, it has been a pleasure finding out more about you and your teaching experience. Let me
briefly summarize the information that I have recorded during our interview
……………………………………………………………
I appreciate the time you took for this interview. Is there anything else you think would be helpful
for me to know so that I can successfully map up your use of discourse strategies? I should have all
the information I need. Would it be alright to arrange for another meeting if I have any question?
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

203

Appendix B

INFORMED CONSENT FORM

STELLENBOSCH UNIVERSITY

CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH

Discourse strategies of lecturers in Higher Education Classroom Interaction: a case study at the
University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

You are asked to participate in a research study conducted by Mr Shartiely from the Department of
General Linguistics at Stellenbosch University. The results of this research will contribute to a PhD
dissertation. You were selected as possible participant in this study because you are an experienced
lecturer teaching large classes, which normally call for lecture method. Since my study targets data
from lectures and not seminars, I find you as quite useful for this research.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study is to identify the discourse strategies that the lecturers of the University of
Dar es Salaam use during classroom interaction in order to categorise and map them in a discourse
strategy framework that will be used to illustrate their occurrence patterns in bilingual tertiary
education.

PROCEDURES

If you volunteer to participate in this study, I would ask you to do the following things:

2.1. Have one of your lectures being audio-visually recorded,

2.2. Participate in a 30 minutes interview with the researcher.


Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

204

POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS

There are no any foreseeable risks or discomforts to you or your students. I shall do my best to
ensure that no interruption or distraction. At most, there will be a low visibility of presence of the
person recording.

POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO YOU AND/OR TO SOCIETY

You will benefit from this study by getting a copy of the audiovisual package of your lecture. This
will work as a tool for reflection and contemplation, if you so wish. Moreover, the outcomes of this
research will be made available to you. It is also intended to assist in reflection on, and possible
development of, lecturing strategies across the University.

PAYMENT FOR PARTICIPATION

Your participation will be entirely voluntary. Therefore, you will not receive any payment.

CONFIDENTIALITY

Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be identified with you
personally will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission. Confidentiality
will be maintained by means of coding your name and the course concerned using a number or
letter, keeping the data in a password protected computer and by limiting access to the original data
to the researcher, supervisor and examiners. When the results are to be published, confidentiality
will be maintained by referring to strategies and uses of language without mentioning names of
courses or lecturers.

PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL

You can choose whether to be in this study or not. If you volunteer to be in this study, you may
withdraw at any time without consequences of any kind. You may also refuse to answer any
questions you do not want to answer and still remain in the study.

IDENTIFITION OF INVESTIGATOR (S)

If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact Mr. Shartiely
(Principal Investigator) at cell number +255-713-340-130, email: etiely@yahoo.com

RIGHTS OF RESEARCH SUBJECT/PARTICIPANT

You may withdraw your consent at any time and discontinue participation without penalty. You are
not waiving any legal claims, rights or remedies because of your participation in this research study.
If you have questions regarding your rights as a research participant, contact Ms Malena Fouché
[mfouche@sun.ac.za; 021 808 4622] at the Division for Research Development.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

205

SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH SUBJECT /PARTICIPANT

The information above was described to me by Mr Erick Shartiely in [English/ Kiswahili] and I am
in command of this language. I was given the opportunity to ask questions and these questions were
answered to my satisfaction.

I hereby consent voluntarily to participate in this study. I have been given a copy of this form.

________________________________________

Name of Subject/Participant

________________________________________

Signature of Subject/Participant Date__________________

SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR

I declare that I explained the information given in this document to __________________ [name of
the subject/participant]. [He/she] was encouraged and given ample time to ask me any questions.
This conversation was conducted in [English/Kiswahili] and no translator was used.

________________________________________ ______________

Signature of Investigator Date


Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

206

Appendix C

ETHICS REVIEW REPORT

Applicant: Mr NE Shartiely
Project title: Discourse strategies of lecturers in Higher Education Classroom
Interaction: a case study at the University of Dar es Salaam,
Tanzania
Nature of research project: PhD (Department of General Linguistics, SU)
Reference number: 486 / 2010
Supervisor: Prof C Anthonissen (Department of General Linguistics, SU)
Date: 2 December 2010
Summary of Research

This research proposal of Mr Shartiely was tabled and considered at a meeting of the Ethics
Committee on 2 December 2010 (in terms of the guidelines prescribed by the Stellenbosch
University Framework Policy to Promote and Ensure Ethically Responsible Research, adopted by
Senate on 20 March 2009). The purpose of this review is to ascertain whether there are any ethical
risks associated with the proposed research project of which the researcher has to be aware of, to
assess the nature and extent of these ethical risks, and to suggest measures that can be taken to avoid
or minimize these risks.

Documents Received:

The Ethics Committee received the following documentation as part of the submission for ethical
clearance:

Documents Received /
Documents Outstanding
A signed application for ethical clearance [signed by the researcher and Received
supervisor; not signed by the Head of Department]
Copies of relevant letters of permission Outstanding
Project proposal Received
Informed Consent Form Received
Interview schedule for lecturers Received
Lecture observation schedule Received
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

207

The purpose of the study is to identify the discourse strategies that lecturers of the University of Dar
es Salaam use during classroom interaction, in order to categorise and map them in a discourse
strategy framework. Selected lectures in the Department of Political Science and Department of
Sociology will be recorded and classroom activities will be observed. Thereafter interviews will be
held with lecturers.

The researcher should respond to feedback from the Research Ethics Committee by submitting the
required documents, notes, or amendments to the office of Mr. Sidney Engelbrecht
(sidney@sun.ac.za / 021 808-9183) in the Division for Research Development, Stellenbosch
University, before the research can commence.

The Research Ethics Committee wishes to provide the following feedback:

Finding of Research Ethics Responses by the Researcher /


Suggestions by REC
Committee (REC): Principal Investigator
1. The Ethics application form A duly signed application form The supervisor is also the Head of
was not signed by the Head of the must be submitted before the start Department
Department. of this study.
2. The researcher indicated in the All letters of permission must be The letter provided by the office
application form (9.1.1) that submitted prior to the start of this of the Vice Chancellor of the
permission will be obtained from study. University of dare es Salaam is
the University of Dar es Salaam, final. The researcher presents it to
as well as the two departments individuals or units as letter of
where the study will be introduction.
conducted.
3. The researcher indicated in the The researcher is requested to The researcher's main motivation
research proposal that he is a explain in a note to the Ethics is what lecturers do during
lecturer in the College of Arts and Committee why a randomized classroom interaction particularly
Social Sciences and that lecturers sampling technique will not be with first year University students
from two departments in this used and how he will ensure, with in a multilingual society with
College will be selected to the purposive sampling, that English as the only Medium of
participate in this study. A selection and response bias would Instruction. The aim is to
purposive sampling method will not affect the results. understand how this context
be used, i.e. the researcher will shapes the process of lecturing
approach specific lecturers and and ultimately identify, describe
ask whether they would and analyse individual lecturer's
participate in the study. It is linguistic behavior during
unclear from the documents classroom interaction.
received whether the researcher Therefore, there is no any
would be able to make an anticipated risk of bias since the
unbiased decision on whom to lecturers, though purposively
include in the study, and that this selected, they must be teaching
type of sampling method would first year students. Furthermore,
not have an effect on the results. the the linguistic behaviours of
lecturers cannot be predicted in
any way and more important is
the fact that the researcher is from
a different department and he has
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

208

Finding of Research Ethics Responses by the Researcher /


Suggestions by REC
Committee (REC): Principal Investigator
never taught or been taught by
any of the selected lecturers.
4. There is a discrepancy in the Please clarify the specific dates Section 4 gives detailed
proposed dates for data collection for data collection in a note to the description of the actual data
(see # 4 and 8 of the application Ethics Committee. collection process while section 8
form). provides general information
about the commencement of the
whole study up to the time of
actual field work. For instance,
during the period of June -July
2010, the researcher made a
recognisance trip to the University
of Dar es Salaam.
5. Lecturers will be video taped The researcher is requested to Noted
during one of their lectures and amend the informed consent form
the researcher will also attend the by explicitly stating that lectures
class for observation. Both will be recorded and that
matters should be brought under participants will have the
the attention of the participants in opportunity to review the
the Informed Consent form. transcripts for verification.

Recommendation:

On the basis of the application submitted to the Ethics Committee, the proposed research project
may continue with the proviso that:

• Researcher will remain within the procedures and protocols indicated in the proposal,
particularly in terms of any undertakings made in terms of the confidentiality of the information
gathered.
• The research will again be submitted for ethical clearance if there is any substantial departure
from the existing proposal.
• The researcher will remain within the parameters of any applicable national legislation,
institutional guidelines and scientific standards relevant to the specific field of research.
• Any notes and/or amendments are submitted to the office of Mr. Sidney Engelbrecht of the
Division for Research Development, Stellenbosch University
• The researcher will consider and implement the foregoing suggestions to lower the ethical risk
associated with the research.
MEMBERS: Profs J Hattingh, C Theron, E Terblanche, Drs. C Thesnaar, G Görgens, G van Zyl, S
Viviers, N Somhlabla & Ms R de Villiers.
Stellenbosch University http://scholar.sun.ac.za

209